Xiang Qi, Zhiyue Mo, Junyu Sui, Yanping Jiang, Bei Wu
{"title":"Psychosocial burdens in early- versus late-onset dementia: analysis of discrimination, stress, and loneliness in the All of Us Research Program.","authors":"Xiang Qi, Zhiyue Mo, Junyu Sui, Yanping Jiang, Bei Wu","doi":"10.1093/geroni/igaf087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Early-onset dementia (EOD, onset before age 65) is relatively rare but often devastating for patients and families. Individuals with dementia face stigma and psychosocial burdens; however, it is unclear whether those with EOD experience worse psychosocial outcomes than those with late-onset dementia (LOD) or no dementia. This study examined differences in psychosocial outcomes across EOD, LOD, and no-dementia groups.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study used data from the All of Us Research Program surveys and linked electronic health records (EHR). Diagnosis of dementia was identified through electronic health records (EOD [<i>n</i> = 442], LOD [<i>n</i> = 658], and without dementia [<i>n</i> = 79,035]). Outcomes included everyday discrimination, discrimination in healthcare settings, perceived stress, and loneliness. Negative binomial regression models were employed to compare outcomes by dementia status, adjusting for demographic, socioeconomic, and health-related covariates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>EOD participants reported the highest mean levels of all psychosocial outcomes (e.g., everyday discrimination score of 8.3 in EOD vs 4.6 in LOD and 6.8 in no-dementia). In the fully-adjusted models, EOD was associated with significantly higher everyday discrimination (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.30, 95% CI 1.05-1.62), discrimination in healthcare settings (IRR = 1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.15), and perceived stress (IRR = 1.09, 95% CI 1.02-1.15) compared with LOD. No difference in loneliness was observed between EOD and LOD (IRR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.98-1.09). Compared with those without dementia, the EOD group also showed elevated levels of all outcomes. All differences remained significant after adjusting for covariates.</p><p><strong>Discussion and implications: </strong>Findings highlight the unique challenges faced by young adults with EOD and underscore the need for targeted interventions to reduce psychosocial burden in this growing population. As the prevalence of EOD continues to rise, clinicians and policymakers should prioritize supportive resources to mitigate these disparities for EOD patients and their families.</p>","PeriodicalId":13596,"journal":{"name":"Innovation in Aging","volume":"9 9","pages":"igaf087"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12505131/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Innovation in Aging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igaf087","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objectives: Early-onset dementia (EOD, onset before age 65) is relatively rare but often devastating for patients and families. Individuals with dementia face stigma and psychosocial burdens; however, it is unclear whether those with EOD experience worse psychosocial outcomes than those with late-onset dementia (LOD) or no dementia. This study examined differences in psychosocial outcomes across EOD, LOD, and no-dementia groups.
Research design and methods: This cross-sectional study used data from the All of Us Research Program surveys and linked electronic health records (EHR). Diagnosis of dementia was identified through electronic health records (EOD [n = 442], LOD [n = 658], and without dementia [n = 79,035]). Outcomes included everyday discrimination, discrimination in healthcare settings, perceived stress, and loneliness. Negative binomial regression models were employed to compare outcomes by dementia status, adjusting for demographic, socioeconomic, and health-related covariates.
Results: EOD participants reported the highest mean levels of all psychosocial outcomes (e.g., everyday discrimination score of 8.3 in EOD vs 4.6 in LOD and 6.8 in no-dementia). In the fully-adjusted models, EOD was associated with significantly higher everyday discrimination (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.30, 95% CI 1.05-1.62), discrimination in healthcare settings (IRR = 1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.15), and perceived stress (IRR = 1.09, 95% CI 1.02-1.15) compared with LOD. No difference in loneliness was observed between EOD and LOD (IRR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.98-1.09). Compared with those without dementia, the EOD group also showed elevated levels of all outcomes. All differences remained significant after adjusting for covariates.
Discussion and implications: Findings highlight the unique challenges faced by young adults with EOD and underscore the need for targeted interventions to reduce psychosocial burden in this growing population. As the prevalence of EOD continues to rise, clinicians and policymakers should prioritize supportive resources to mitigate these disparities for EOD patients and their families.
期刊介绍:
Innovation in Aging, an interdisciplinary Open Access journal of the Gerontological Society of America (GSA), is dedicated to publishing innovative, conceptually robust, and methodologically rigorous research focused on aging and the life course. The journal aims to present studies with the potential to significantly enhance the health, functionality, and overall well-being of older adults by translating scientific insights into practical applications. Research published in the journal spans a variety of settings, including community, clinical, and laboratory contexts, with a clear emphasis on issues that are directly pertinent to aging and the dynamics of life over time. The content of the journal mirrors the diverse research interests of GSA members and encompasses a range of study types. These include the validation of new conceptual or theoretical models, assessments of factors impacting the health and well-being of older adults, evaluations of interventions and policies, the implementation of groundbreaking research methodologies, interdisciplinary research that adapts concepts and methods from other fields to aging studies, and the use of modeling and simulations to understand factors and processes influencing aging outcomes. The journal welcomes contributions from scholars across various disciplines, such as technology, engineering, architecture, economics, business, law, political science, public policy, education, public health, social and psychological sciences, biomedical and health sciences, and the humanities and arts, reflecting a holistic approach to advancing knowledge in gerontology.