The role of nativity in heterogeneous dementia incidence in a large cohort of three Asian American groups and white older adults in California

A systematic review/meta-analysis of prevalence and incidence rates illustrates systemic underrepresentation of individuals racialized as Asian and/or Asian-American in ADRD research

We investigate Alzheimer's disease and related dementia (ADRD) prevalence, incidence rate, and risk factors in individuals racialized as Asian and/or Asian-American and assess sample representation. Prevalence, incidence rate, risk factors, and heterogeneity of samples were assessed. Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted, generating pooled estimates. Of 920 records across 14 databases, 45 studies were included. Individuals racialized as Asian and/or Asian-American were mainly from Eastern and Southern Asia, had higher education, and constituted a smaller sample relative to non-Hispanic white cohorts. The average prevalence was 10.9%, ranging from 0.4% to 46%. The average incidence rate was 20.03 (12.01-33.8) per 1000 person-years with a range of 75.19-13.59 (12.89-14.33). Risk factors included physiological, genetic, psychological, behavioral, and social factors. This review underscores the systemic underrepresentation of individuals racialized as Asian and/or Asian-American in ADRD research and the need for inclusive approaches accounting for culture, language, and immigration status. HIGHLIGHTS: There is considerable heterogeneity in the prevalence of ADRD among studies of Asian-Americans. There is limited data on group-specific risk factors for ADRD among Asian-Americans. The average prevalence of (ADRD) among Asian-Americans was found to be 7.4%, with a wide range from 0.5% to 46%.

Selection Bias in Health Research: Quantifying, Eliminating, or Exacerbating Health Disparities?

Purpose of review

To summarize recent literature on selection bias in disparities research addressing either descriptive or causal questions, with examples from dementia research.

Recent findings

Defining a clear estimand, including the target population, is essential to assess whether generalizability bias or collider-stratification bias are threats to inferences. Selection bias in disparities research can result from sampling strategies, differential inclusion pipelines, loss to follow-up, and competing events. If competing events occur, several potentially relevant estimands can be estimated under different assumptions, with different interpretations. The apparent magnitude of a disparity can differ substantially based on the chosen estimand. Both randomized and observational studies may misrepresent health disparities or heterogeneity in treatment effects if they are not based on a known sampling scheme.

Conclusion

Researchers have recently made substantial progress in conceptualization and methods related to selection bias. This progress will improve the relevance of both descriptive and causal health disparities research.

Racial, ethnic and neighborhood socioeconomic differences in incidence of dementia: A regional retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the effects of neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage on dementia risk in racially and ethically diverse populations is limited. Our objective was to evaluate the relative extent to which neighborhood disadvantage accounts for racial/ethnic variation in dementia incidence rates. Secondarily, we evaluated the spatial relationship between neighborhood disadvantage and dementia risk.

METHODS

In this retrospective study using electronic health records (EHR) at two regional health systems in Northeast Ohio, participants included 253,421 patients aged >60 years who had an outpatient primary care visit between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2015. The date of the first qualifying visit served as the study baseline. Cumulative incidence of composite dementia outcome, defined as EHR-documented dementia diagnosis or dementia-related death, stratified by neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation (as measured by Area Deprivation Index) was determined by competing-risk regression analysis, with non-dementia-related death as the competing risk. Fine-Gray sub-distribution hazard ratios were determined for neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation, race/ethnicity, and clinical risk factors. The degree to which neighborhood socioeconomic position accounted for racial/ethnic disparities in the incidence of composite dementia outcome was evaluated via mediation analysis with Poisson rate models.

RESULTS

Increasing neighborhood disadvantage was associated with increased risk of EHR-documented dementia diagnosis or dementia-related death (most vs. least disadvantaged ADI quintile HR = 1.76, 95% confidence interval = 1.69-1.84) after adjusting for age and sex. The effect of neighborhood disadvantage on this composite dementia outcome remained after accounting for known medical risk factors of dementia. Mediation analysis indicated that neighborhood disadvantage accounted for 34% and 29% of the elevated risk for composite dementia outcome in Hispanic and Black patients compared to White patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Neighborhood disadvantage is related to the risk of EHR-documented dementia diagnosis or dementia-related death and accounts for a portion of racial/ethnic differences in dementia burden, even after adjustment for clinically important confounders.

Neighborhood disadvantage and dementia incidence in a cohort of Asian American and non-Latino White older adults in Northern California

INTRODUCTION

Some evidence suggests that neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with dementia-related outcomes. However, prior research is predominantly among non-Latino Whites.

METHODS

We evaluated the association between neighborhood disadvantage (Area Deprivation Index [ADI]) and dementia incidence in Asian American (n = 18,103) and non-Latino White (n = 149,385) members of a Northern California integrated health care delivery system aged 60 to 89 at baseline. Race/ethnicity-specific Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for individual-level age, sex, socioeconomic measures, and block group population density estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for dementia.

RESULTS

Among non-Latino Whites, ADI was associated with dementia incidence (most vs. least disadvantaged ADI quintile HR = 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02-1.15). Among Asian Americans, associations were close to null (e.g., most vs. least disadvantaged ADI quintile HR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.85-1.21).

DISCUSSION

ADI was associated with dementia incidence among non-Latino Whites but not Asian Americans. Understanding the potentially different mechanisms driving dementia incidence in these groups could inform dementia prevention efforts.