ArticleEuropean journal of epidemiology2025
Uncertainty in the estimated effects of statin initiation on risk of dementia: using a multiverse analysis to assess sources of variability.
Article in European journal of epidemiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Negatives about positivity and consistency as conditions for causal inference.American journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Triangulation in biomedical research: navigating an ocean of uncertainty.European journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mixed evidence on how statins affect dementia risk may reflect variability in model specifications. Alternate specifications are rarely systematically compared. Using an emulated trial design framework, we investigated variation in the estimated effect of statin initiation on dementia across alternative (1) eligibility criteria, (2) confounding variable sets, and (3) outcome definitions. Kaiser Permanente Northern California members' linked electronic health records from 1996 to 2020 were used to identify statin initiation and dementia diagnoses. Statin initiators were matched on age and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol with up to 5 non-initiators. Possible covariates included clinical (n = 1.4 million); socioeconomic and behavioral (n = 265,224); and genetic (n = 69,573) variables. Using Cox proportional-hazards models, we estimated variation across 1.27 million intent-to-treat estimates for statin initiation varying specification of eligibility, outcome definition, and covariates. Estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for statin initiation on dementia across all specifications ranged from 0.93 to 1.47. The variance of estimates due to model specification differences was 7.6 times larger than the average variance of specific estimates due to finite sample size. Three modeling decisions notably attenuated coefficients [ln(HR)]: requiring a run-in period prior to the emulated trial start date (0.034); adjustment for diabetes (0.030) and cardiovascular disease (0.039); and excluding the first year of follow-up (0.041). HRs from models with all three specifications ranged from 0.99 to 1.15. No specification we evaluated consistently generated protective effects. Estimates of the association between statin initiation and dementia leveraging real world data are sensitive to model specification, especially decisions related to clinical covariates and time-at-risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.