Canada’s changing dementia landscape: Preliminary findings from The Landmark Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background As with many nations, the prevalence of dementia in Canada is expected to rise dramatically in the upcoming decades as the population ages. The Landmark Study is aimed at updating these estimates and the broader population changes associated for the Canadian population made in the 2010 Rising Tide Report. Method Using the Canadian Centre for Economic Analysis’s socio‐economic statistical analysis platform, a simulation model was developed using demographic characteristics (age, sex, ethnicity) and risk factors for dementia to forecast the burden of dementia in Canada over the next 30 years. This approach allows for comparisons across sex, ethnicity, provinces, while accounting for population dynamics including immigration. The model was also used to examine how a delay in incidence (1‐year, 5‐years, 10‐years) would impact prevalence and incident cases. Result As expected, the model forecasts the number of Canadians with dementia to more than double in the next 30 years: 493,718 (2020; 59.6% female) to 1,296,707(2050; 61.2% female; Figure 1). With changing immigration patterns, the ethnic background of people with dementia will be quite different than today. People with Asian origin could increase from 8% of people with dementia today to 24% by 2050 (Figure 2). The changes are driven both by future immigration, and people who have already immigrated to Canada in the past. Delays in onset of 1 year would avoid over 300K cases, whereas a deferred incidence of 10 years would bring Canadian dementia rates to lower than where it is today (Figure 3). With the increase in prevalence of dementia, comes an increase in the number of informal caregivers and the number of hours providing care to persons living with dementia. The number of informal caregivers in 2020 (349,551; 472.6 million hours/year) is projected to increase in 2050 to 1,005,815 (1,386 million hours/year; Figure 4). Conclusion This study forecasts rising dementia prevalence in Canada, illustrates the changing landscape of ethnicity in Canadians living with dementia, and estimates the population‐level impacts of interventions that delay onset of dementia would have on prevalence, incidence, and informal care.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".