Cost of care for Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias in the United States: 2016 to 2060
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Medical and long-term care for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRDs) can impose a large economic burden on individuals and societies. We estimated the per capita cost of ADRDs care in the in the United States in 2016 and projected future aggregate care costs during 2020-2060. Based on a previously published methodology, we used U.S. Health and Retirement Survey (2010-2016) longitudinal data to estimate formal and informal care costs. In 2016, the estimated per patient cost of formal care was $28,078 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $25,893-$30,433), and informal care cost valued in terms of replacement cost and forgone wages was $36,667 ($34,025-$39,473) and $15,792 ($12,980-$18,713), respectively. Aggregate formal care cost and formal plus informal care cost using replacement cost and forgone wage methods were $196 billion (95% uncertainty range [UR]: $179-$213 billion), $450 billion ($424-$478 billion), and $305 billion ($278-$333 billion), respectively, in 2020. These were projected to increase to $1.4 trillion ($837 billion-$2.2 trillion), $3.3 trillion ($1.9-$5.1 trillion), and $2.2 trillion ($1.3-$3.5 trillion), respectively, in 2060.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".