SynthesisThe journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease2026
Knowledge and perception of dementia risk and protective factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOptimal dementia risk reduction strategies benefit from sufficient public knowledge of risk factors and risk perception, but current public awareness is uncertain.
methodsIn a systematic literature review on public knowledge and perception of dementia risk factors, we searched relevant databases for original research articles until 2024. When possible, we pooled study results using random effects meta-analysis, and explored sources of heterogeneity through meta-regression. Qualitative studies and studies about risk perception were analysed using narrative synthesis.
findingsOf 4996 articles screened, 155 were eligible for inclusion. Of these, 125 reported on knowledge of risk factors and 50 on risk perception, jointly providing data from 164,644 participants in 41 countries across 6 continents. Recognition of the 28 queried risk and protective factors was moderate, somewhat higher for lifestyle factors (medians: 38.5-71.5%) than for cardiovascular (9.9-66.9%) and environmental (25.4-44.4%) factors, but with large heterogeneity across queried factors. With the exception of physical activity (71.5%, IQR:46.9-88.3%), social isolation (66.6% [23.7-84.0%]) and traumatic brain injury (65.0% [18.0-76.7%]), recognition of all established modifiable risk factors for dementia from prespecified lists was below 50%, lowest for education (19.5% [7.8-54.9%]), air pollution (25.4% [16.3-41.0%]), and obesity (30.4% [27.0-43.0%]). Recall of risk factors (7 studies) was markedly lower than recognition. Meta-regression analyses showed no consistent differences by year of publication, or by participants' age, gender, and educational attainment. Among 23 qualitative studies, limited knowledge emerged particularly regarding dementia-specific risk factors like hearing loss. Perceived risk was measured inconsistently across studies, but was generally moderate to high, along with notable worry about dementia in a large part of the older population.
conclusionsKnowledge of dementia risk and protective factors in the general population remains limited. These findings call for population-level interventions, including educational campaigns, to enhance preventive strategies.
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.