MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407351192 · doi:10.1002/trc2.70047

Rural–urban disparities of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias: A scoping review

2025· review· en· W4407351192 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marilyn Kramer, Maxwell Cutty, Sara Knox, Alexander V. Alekseyenko, Abolfazl Mollalo

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia Translational Research & Clinical Interventions · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsCINAHLGerontologyMedicineDementiaEnvironmental healthMEDLINEScopusHealth equityRural areaMeta-analysisPublic healthPopulationDiseasePsychological interventionPathologyPolitical sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rising age of the global population has made Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) a critical public health problem, with significant health-related disparities observed between rural and urban areas. However, no previous reviews have examined the scope and determinant factors contributing to rural-urban disparities of ADRD-related health outcomes. This study aims to systematically collate and synthesize peer-reviewed articles on rural-urban disparities in ADRD, identifying key determinants and research gaps to guide future research. We conducted a systematic search using key terms related to rural-urban disparities and ADRD without restrictions on geography or study design. Five search engines-MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus-were used to identify relevant articles. The search was performed on August 16, 2024, and included English-language articles published from 2000 onward. Sixty-three articles met the eligibility criteria for data extraction and synthesis. Most articles were published after 2010 (85.7%) and were concentrated in the United States, China, and Canada (66.7%). A majority had cross-sectional (58.7%) or cohort study designs (23.8%), primarily examining prevalence (41.3%) or incidence (11.1%). Findings often indicated a higher prevalence and incidence in rural areas, although inconsistent rural-urban classification systems were noted. Common risk factors included female sex, lower education level, lower income, and comorbidities such as diabetes and cerebrovascular diseases. Environmental (12.7%) and lifestyle (14.3%) factors for ADRD have been less explored. The statistical methods used were mainly traditional analyses (e.g., logistic regression) and lacked advanced techniques such as machine learning or causal inference methods. The gaps identified in this review emphasize the need for future research in underexplored geographic regions and encourage the use of advanced methods to investigate understudied factors contributing to ADRD disparities, such as environmental, lifestyle, and genetic influences. Highlights: Few studies on rural-urban ADRD disparities focus on low- and middle-income countries.Common risk factors include female sex, low education attainment, low income, and comorbidities.Inconsistent definitions of "rural" complicate cross-country comparisons.Environmental and lifestyle factors affecting ADRD are underexplored.Advanced statistical methods, such as machine learning and causal inference, are recommended.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.748
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.294
GPT teacher head0.559
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia Translational Research & Clinical InterventionsSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207