MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3184238291 · doi:10.1016/s2666-7568(21)00140-9

Mortality rates in Alzheimer's disease and non-Alzheimer's dementias: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021· review· en· W3184238291 sur OpenAlexafffundabout
Chih‐Sung Liang, Dian‐Jeng Li, Fu‐Chi Yang, Ping‐Tao Tseng, André F. Carvalho, Brendon Stubbs, Trevor Thompson, Christoph Mueller, Jae Il Shin, Joaquim Raduà, Robert Stewart, Tarek K. Rajji, Yu‐Kang Tu, Tien‐Yu Chen, Ta‐Chuan Yeh, Chia‐Kuang Tsai, Chia‐Ling Yu, Chih‐Chuan Pan, Che‐Sheng Chu

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Lancet Healthy Longevity · 2021
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Établissements canadiensToronto Dementia Research AllianceUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Organismes subventionnairesOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationMedical Research CouncilNational Institutes of HealthOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceCanada Research ChairsKing's College LondonNational Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration South LondonBrain and Behavior Research FoundationDepartment of Health and Social CareNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareCanada Foundation for InnovationFondation Brain CanadaKing's College Hospital NHS Foundation TrustBrightFocus FoundationGuy's and St Thomas' CharityCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWeston Brain Institute
Mots-clésDementiaMeta-analysisMedicineCochrane LibraryHazard ratioCohort studySystematic reviewDiseaseAlzheimer's diseaseMEDLINEGerontologyConfidence intervalInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background People with dementia die prematurely. Identifying differences in mortality rates between different types of dementia might aid in the development of preventive interventions for the most vulnerable populations. The aim of this study was to compare the difference in mortality rates between individuals without dementia and individuals with various types of dementia. Methods For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we did a systematic search of MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to July 11, 2020, for cross-sectional or cohort studies that assessed mortality and survival-related outcomes among people with different types of dementia compared with people without dementia. Single-arm studies without comparison groups and autopsy studies or family studies that used a selected sample were excluded. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used by two authors (D-JL and C-SC) independently to measure the methodological quality of included studies, and two authors (F-CY and P-TT) independently extracted data. We assessed differences in all-cause mortality rate and survival time from dementia diagnosis between individuals without dementia, individuals with Alzheimer's disease, and individuals with non-Alzheimer's disease dementias. The secondary outcomes were age at death and survival time from disease onset. Random-effects meta-analyses were done. Effect sizes included hazard ratios (HRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. Potential moderators, including age-associated moderators, were identified through meta-regression and subgroup analyses. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020198786. Findings Our database search identified 11 973 records, and we included 78 eligible studies in our analyses, encompassing 63 125 individuals with dementia and 152 353 controls. Individuals with any type of dementia had a higher mortality rate than individuals without dementia (HR 5·90, 95% CI 3·53 to 9·86), and the HR for all-cause mortality was highest for Lewy body dementia (17·88, 5·87 to 54·46). After diagnosis, the mean survival time for people with Alzheimer's disease was 5·8 years (SD 2·0). Compared with people with Alzheimer's disease, a diagnosis of any non-Alzheimer's disease dementia was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality (HR 1·33, 1·21 to 1·46), a shorter survival time from diagnosis (MD −1·12 years, 95% CI −1·52 to −0·72), and a younger age at death (−1·76 years, −2·66 to −0·85). Survival time from disease onset was also shorter in people with non-Alzheimer's dementia, across types, compared with people with Alzheimer's disease, but the subgroup analysis revealed that this difference was only significant for vascular dementia (MD −1·27 years, −1·90 to −0·65) and dementia with Lewy bodies (MD −1·06 years, −1·68 to −0·44). The interactions between age and several survival-related outcomes were significant. 39 (50%) of the 78 included studies were rated as good quality, and large heterogeneity ( I 2 >75%) was observed for most of the study outcomes. Interpretation Alzheimer's disease is the most common type of dementia and one of the major causes of mortality worldwide. However, the findings from the current study suggest that non-Alzheimer's disease dementias were associated with higher morality rates and shorter life expectancy than Alzheimer's disease. Developing tailored treatment and rehabilitation programmes for different types of dementia is important for mental health providers, patients, and their families. Funding None.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,021
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Méta-analyse · Signal consensuel: Méta-analyse
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,023
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,111

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0210,045
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0040,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0230,054
Bibliométrie0,0100,009
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0040,002
Science ouverte0,0030,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,233
Tête enseignante GPT0,472
Écart entre enseignants0,240 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeMéta-analyse
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations207
Publié2021
Routes d'admission3
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Lancet Healthy LongevityMême sujetDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchTravaux en français237 207