ReviewNature reviews. Neurology2026
The Nottingham consensus on dementia risk reduction policy: recommendations from a modified Delphi process.
Review in Nature reviews. Neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From mapping evidence to engaging voices: Paving the way for research on the social determinants of dementia.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Article
- The principles of Population-Level Approaches to Dementia Risk Reduction (PLADRR).PLoS medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
42 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Translation of evidence about dementia risk and its reduction into effective, equitable public health policy is a major challenge. To address this challenge, the National Institute for Health and Care Research Policy Research Unit in Dementia and Neurodegeneration at Queen Mary University of London (DeNPRU-QM) convened a multidisciplinary panel of 40 experts from across England, with diverse lived, academic, clinical, policy and advocacy experience, at various career stages, and of diverse gender and ethnicity, to develop actionable policy recommendations for dementia risk reduction. Through a 2-day in-person workshop and a subsequent three-round modified Delphi survey, the panel evaluated and refined statements on dementia prevention. The panel achieved consensus on 56 recommendations in four domains: public health messaging, individual-level interventions, population-level interventions and research commissioning. A key priority across all domains was the need to consider and address health inequalities so that prevention efforts do not exacerbate existing disparities. Our recommendations provide policymakers with a robust foundation for designing and implementing an evidence-based dementia prevention strategy in England and provide guidance that can inform approaches in other countries and contexts. By prioritizing clear communication, targeted intervention and sustained research investment, the recommendations can help to address structural inequities and advance dementia risk reduction. Ongoing cross-sector advocacy will be crucial in driving policy adoption and implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41545741What 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.