MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413278410 · doi:10.7759/cureus.90418

Incidence of Dementia in Canada: A National Trend Analysis of Newly Diagnosed Cases

2025· article· en· W4413278410 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Oluwatomiwa S Fasoro, Ajibola O Jayeola, Okelue E Okobi, Joan O Osaigbovo, Angela C Onojedje, Oluchi C Abah, A C Okoro, Chinasa Okeke-Chikelu

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)DementiaTrend analysisPediatricsGerontologyDemographyEnvironmental healthInternal medicineDiseaseStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Dementia is a progressive neurocognitive disorder affecting aging populations worldwide. Understanding its incidence trends is essential for planning preventive strategies and healthcare services, particularly in countries with aging demographics like Canada. This study aimed to examine national trends in the age-standardized incidence rates of newly diagnosed dementia, including Alzheimer's disease, among Canadians aged 65 years or older from 2007 to 2022. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, population-based trend analysis using the Canadian Chronic Disease Surveillance System (CCDSS), administered by the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC). The CCDSS aggregates de-identified administrative health data supplied by provincial and territorial health ministries, including physician billing claims, hospital discharge abstracts, and health insurance registry data. Dementia cases were ascertained using validated International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9/ICD-10 diagnostic codes for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias applied to physician and hospital records (case definition and code list per CCDSS protocols). The study period covered fiscal years 2007-2008 through 2021-2022, with supplementary data for 2022-2023 where available. Age-standardized incidence rates were calculated using the 2011 Canadian standard population. Data completeness for physician billing and hospital discharge records exceeded 95% in participating jurisdictions; however, some provinces/territories had partial or missing submissions in certain years. All analyses used aggregated, de-identified counts provided by CCDSS; no individual-level records were accessed. RESULTS: In 2022, the crude incidence rate of newly diagnosed dementia among Canadians aged 65 years and older was 1,323 per 100,000 population per year (95%CI: 1315-1331). By sex, females had a higher crude incidence (1,437 per 100,000 population per year; 95%CI: 1425-1449) than males (1,194 per 100,000 population per year; 95%CI: 1183-1206). Incidence increased markedly with advancing age: 610 per 100,000 population per year (95%CI: 604-617) in those aged 65-79, and 3,669 per 100,000 population per year (95%CI: 3640-3697) among individuals aged more than 80. Regional disparities were observed: Nunavut had the highest age-standardized rate (1,700 per 100,000 population per year; 95%CI: 921-2969) while Saskatchewan had the lowest (1,154 per 100,000 population per year; 95%CI: 1108-1203). From 2007 to 2022, the age-standardized incidence declined overall; this pattern may potentially reflect improvements in prevention, risk-factor control, or early detection, although causal attribution cannot be established from these data alone. CONCLUSION: Although the age-standardized incidence of newly diagnosed dementia in Canada declined modestly between 2007 and 2022, substantial sex, age, and regional disparities remain. The findings emphasize the need for ongoing investment in dementia prevention, equitable diagnostic access, and region-specific interventions. With the aging population, coordinated public health strategies remain essential to sustain progress and reduce the future burden of dementia on individuals, caregivers, and healthcare systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureus→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→