ArticleThe journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences2026
A comparison of dementia-free life expectancy estimates across competing algorithmic classifications: new knowledge and considerations from the health and retirement study.
Article in The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo create new dementia-free life expectancy estimates based on three competing algorithmic classifications of dementia and compare these estimates with dementia-free life expectancy estimates based on the well-established Langa-Weir (LW) dementia classification to ascertain the consistency of competing algorithmic methods on the overall burden of quality of life measured by the number of years lived dementia-free and the proportion of late-life years dementia-free to total life expectancy.
methodsData from the Health and Retirement Study (1998-2016) are used to estimate Sullivan-based life tables of dementia-free life expectancies by race/ethnicity, nativity, and gender for adults aged 70 and older. Dementia ascertainment was operationalized using the Langa-Weir (LW), Expert, Hurd, and LASSO classifications. We test for both within-group differences (i.e., nativity for Latinos) and gender differences to comprehensively document the overall burden of dementia among at-risk populations.
resultsExpert, LASSO, and Hurd competing algorithm estimates were generally equal to the LW estimates for dementia prevalence after age 70, with a few exceptions. White men and women, and Black women exhibit better cognitive functioning in the LW model, whereas the results for other race/ethnic and nativity groups are more consistent across models. DISCUSSION: Small differences in population-level estimates across algorithmic classification are observed; however, these small differences may be important for understanding disparities across groups. Therefore, more work is needed (1) to understand for whom and which models are most accurately identifying dementia and (2) to place these models relative to gold-standard adjudicated dementia assessments.
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.