Trends in prevalence of self-reports of Alzheimer’s disease/dementia among non-institutionalized individuals 45+ in Canada, 1994–2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Alzheimer's disease/dementia (AD) prevalence is of concern globally and in Canada owing to the rapidly aging population and increase in life expectancy. This study explored: (1) trends in the overall prevalence of self-reported AD/dementia by sex, age groups, educational levels, and geographic areas in Canada from 1994 to 2014, and (2) assessed what the observed trends mean in the context of the aging Canadian population and the health care system. Design and methods: This cross-sectional study used Canadian national survey data. Data for this study were from two Canadian national health surveys (National Population Health Survey and the Canadian Community Health Survey), between 1994 and 2014. After age-sex standardization, trends in the prevalence of self-reported Alzheimer's disease/dementia were tracked over time. The two cross-sectional surveys used similar diagnostic criteria over the years. Results: The overall prevalence of Alzheimer's disease/dementia increased from 0.14 in 1994 to 0.80 in 2014 representing a 0.66-point increase over the 20 years. Alzheimer's disease/dementia prevalence increased with age across all years but was more pronounced after age 80. Men 65+ years, those with lower education, and Canadians living in Central Canada had an increased prevalence. Conclusions: The overall prevalence of Alzheimer's disease/dementia in the community increased over time. This study highlights the importance of establishing effective community-based prevention strategies that focus on minimizing risk and optimizing protection as well as health system capacity strengthening and preparation for long-term care including increased demand for neurologists' services, increased associated disability, psychosocial difficulties, rising costs, and caregiver burden.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".