Assessing the 10/66 dementia classification algorithm for international comparative analyses with the United States

Cross-national comparisons of dementia prevalence are essential for identifying unique determinants and cultural-specific risk factors, but methodological differences in dementia classification across countries hinder global comparisons. This study maps the 10/66 algorithm for dementia classification, widely used and validated in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), to the US Aging, Demographics, and Memory Study (ADAMS), the dementia sub-study of the Health and Retirement Study, and assesses its performance in ADAMS. We identified the subset of 10/66 algorithm items comparably measured in ADAMS, then used these items to retrain the 10/66 algorithm against the ADAMS clinical dementia diagnosis, using k-fold cross-validation to assess performance. We compared the modified 10/66 algorithm to 4 other dementia classification algorithms previously validated in ADAMS, both for overall dementia estimation as well as for estimating education gradients. The modified 10/66 algorithm had higher sensitivity (87%) and specificity (93%) than the comparison algorithms. All the algorithms overestimated the education gradient in dementia, although the modest ADAMS sample size precludes precise comparisons of education gradient accuracy. Overall, we found that the modified 10/66 algorithm performs well in classifying dementia status in the United States. Our results support the validity of risk factor comparisons between US and 10/66 LMIC dementia data sets. This article is part of a Special Collection on Cross-National Gerontology.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
American Journal of Epidemiology
Published
2024-12-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwae470
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.13

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessing the 10/66 dementia classification algorithm for international comparative analyses with the United States

Juan J. Llibre Rodríguez, William H. Dow, Mao‐Mei Liu, Ana M Rodriguez‐Salgado et al.
1 citations
American Journal of Epidemiology
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
1.13
article

Assessing the 10/66 dementia classification algorithm for international comparative analyses with the United States

Juan J. Llibre Rodríguez, William H. Dow, Mao‐Mei Liu, Ana M Rodriguez‐Salgado, Jordan Weiss, Carlos Soria, Ivonne Z. Jiménez Velázquez, Jing Li, Daisy Acosta, Jorge J. Llibre Guerra
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Cross-national comparisons of dementia prevalence are essential for identifying unique determinants and cultural-specific risk factors, but methodological differences in dementia classification across countries hinder global comparisons. This study maps the 10/66 algorithm for dementia classification, widely used and validated in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), to the US Aging, Demographics, and Memory Study (ADAMS), the dementia sub-study of the Health and Retirement Study, and assesses its performance in ADAMS. We identified the subset of 10/66 algorithm items comparably measured in ADAMS, then used these items to retrain the 10/66 algorithm against the ADAMS clinical dementia diagnosis, using k-fold cross-validation to assess performance. We compared the modified 10/66 algorithm to 4 other dementia classification algorithms previously validated in ADAMS, both for overall dementia estimation as well as for estimating education gradients. The modified 10/66 algorithm had higher sensitivity (87%) and specificity (93%) than the comparison algorithms. All the algorithms overestimated the education gradient in dementia, although the modest ADAMS sample size precludes precise comparisons of education gradient accuracy. Overall, we found that the modified 10/66 algorithm performs well in classifying dementia status in the United States. Our results support the validity of risk factor comparisons between US and 10/66 LMIC dementia data sets. This article is part of a Special Collection on Cross-National Gerontology.

American Journal of EpidemiologyVol. 194(11)
University of Puerto Rico System (PR), University of Washington (US), Washington University in St. Louis (US), University of Havana (CU), Agricultural University of Havana (CU), Universidad Nacional Pedro Henríquez Ureña (DO), Stanford Medicine (US), Berkeley Public Health Division (US), Seattle University (US), University of California, Berkeley (US), Stanford University (US)
Alzheimer's Association, World Health Organization, Wellcome Trust, Fondo Nacional de Ciencia Tecnología e Innovación, National Institutes of Health
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
1.13
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.