荷兰多种族人群的中年痴呆风险评分:HELIUS研究。

Josephine Lindhout, Anne Roos van der Endt, Marieke P Hoevenaar-Blom, Jan Willem van Dalen, Kay Deckers, Mirjam I Geerlings, Henrike Galenkamp, Edo Richard, Eric P Moll van Charante
{"title":"荷兰多种族人群的中年痴呆风险评分:HELIUS研究。","authors":"Josephine Lindhout, Anne Roos van der Endt, Marieke P Hoevenaar-Blom, Jan Willem van Dalen, Kay Deckers, Mirjam I Geerlings, Henrike Galenkamp, Edo Richard, Eric P Moll van Charante","doi":"10.1093/pubmed/fdae315","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Migrant populations in the Netherlands may face greater dementia risk factor burden than Dutch natives.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To study whether midlife dementia risk scores differ by ethnicity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We calculated three validated dementia risk scores in participants aged 40-70 years of Dutch (n = 2978), South-Asian Surinamese (n = 2084), African Surinamese (n = 3135), Ghanaian (n = 1699), Turkish (n = 2000), and Moroccan (n = 2025) background, from the HELIUS study (Amsterdam, the Netherlands): Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging and Incidence of Dementia (CAIDE), LIfestyle for BRAin Health (LIBRA), and Australian National University-Alzheimer's Disease Risk Index (ANU-ADRI). We cross-sectionally compared scores between ethnicities using linear regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ethnic minority groups had higher risk scores than those with a Dutch background (CAIDE: +0.66-1.35; LIBRA: +0.66-1.43; ANU-ADRI: +2.75-7.25). CAIDE estimated an absolute 20-year incident dementia risk of 2.6% for Dutch, 3.4% for South-Asian Surinamese, 3.6% for Turkish, 3.7% for Moroccan, 3.7% for African Surinamese and 4.5% for Ghanaian populations. Differences were greater when removing age from scores (CAIDE +0.89-2.22; ANU-ADRI +3.03-8.20), implying that this higher risk score is independent of age.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Migrant populations had higher dementia risk scores than Dutch natives. Validation of these scores in migrant populations is warranted. If replicated, ethnicity should be considered when estimating dementia risk and developing preventive strategies for high-risk populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":94107,"journal":{"name":"Journal of public health (Oxford, England)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Midlife dementia risk scores in a multi-ethnic population in the Netherlands: the HELIUS study.\",\"authors\":\"Josephine Lindhout, Anne Roos van der Endt, Marieke P Hoevenaar-Blom, Jan Willem van Dalen, Kay Deckers, Mirjam I Geerlings, Henrike Galenkamp, Edo Richard, Eric P Moll van Charante\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/pubmed/fdae315\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Migrant populations in the Netherlands may face greater dementia risk factor burden than Dutch natives.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To study whether midlife dementia risk scores differ by ethnicity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We calculated three validated dementia risk scores in participants aged 40-70 years of Dutch (n = 2978), South-Asian Surinamese (n = 2084), African Surinamese (n = 3135), Ghanaian (n = 1699), Turkish (n = 2000), and Moroccan (n = 2025) background, from the HELIUS study (Amsterdam, the Netherlands): Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging and Incidence of Dementia (CAIDE), LIfestyle for BRAin Health (LIBRA), and Australian National University-Alzheimer's Disease Risk Index (ANU-ADRI). We cross-sectionally compared scores between ethnicities using linear regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ethnic minority groups had higher risk scores than those with a Dutch background (CAIDE: +0.66-1.35; LIBRA: +0.66-1.43; ANU-ADRI: +2.75-7.25). CAIDE estimated an absolute 20-year incident dementia risk of 2.6% for Dutch, 3.4% for South-Asian Surinamese, 3.6% for Turkish, 3.7% for Moroccan, 3.7% for African Surinamese and 4.5% for Ghanaian populations. Differences were greater when removing age from scores (CAIDE +0.89-2.22; ANU-ADRI +3.03-8.20), implying that this higher risk score is independent of age.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Migrant populations had higher dementia risk scores than Dutch natives. Validation of these scores in migrant populations is warranted. If replicated, ethnicity should be considered when estimating dementia risk and developing preventive strategies for high-risk populations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94107,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of public health (Oxford, England)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of public health (Oxford, England)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdae315\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of public health (Oxford, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdae315","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:荷兰的移民人口可能比荷兰本地人面临更大的痴呆风险因素负担。目的:研究中年痴呆风险评分是否因种族而异。方法:我们计算了来自HELIUS研究(荷兰阿姆斯特丹)的年龄在40-70岁的荷兰人(n = 2978)、南亚苏里南人(n = 2084)、非洲苏里南人(n = 3135)、加纳人(n = 1699)、土耳其人(n = 2000)和摩洛哥人(n = 2025)背景的三种经过验证的痴呆风险评分:心血管危险因素、衰老和痴呆发病率(CAIDE)、脑健康生活方式(LIBRA)和澳大利亚国立大学-阿尔茨海默病风险指数(ANU-ADRI)。我们使用线性回归对不同种族之间的分数进行了横断面比较。结果:少数民族人群的风险评分高于荷兰背景人群(CAIDE: +0.66-1.35;天秤座:+ 0.66 - -1.43;ANU-ADRI: + 2.75 - -7.25)。CAIDE估计荷兰人20年痴呆发病的绝对风险为2.6%,南亚苏里南人3.4%,土耳其人3.6%,摩洛哥人3.7%,非洲苏里南人3.7%,加纳人4.5%。当从评分中剔除年龄时,差异更大(CAIDE +0.89-2.22;ANU-ADRI +3.03-8.20),这意味着这个较高的风险评分与年龄无关。结论:移民人群的痴呆风险评分高于荷兰本地人。在移民人群中验证这些分数是有必要的。如果重复,在估计痴呆风险和为高危人群制定预防策略时应考虑种族。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Midlife dementia risk scores in a multi-ethnic population in the Netherlands: the HELIUS study.

Background: Migrant populations in the Netherlands may face greater dementia risk factor burden than Dutch natives.

Objectives: To study whether midlife dementia risk scores differ by ethnicity.

Methods: We calculated three validated dementia risk scores in participants aged 40-70 years of Dutch (n = 2978), South-Asian Surinamese (n = 2084), African Surinamese (n = 3135), Ghanaian (n = 1699), Turkish (n = 2000), and Moroccan (n = 2025) background, from the HELIUS study (Amsterdam, the Netherlands): Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging and Incidence of Dementia (CAIDE), LIfestyle for BRAin Health (LIBRA), and Australian National University-Alzheimer's Disease Risk Index (ANU-ADRI). We cross-sectionally compared scores between ethnicities using linear regression.

Results: Ethnic minority groups had higher risk scores than those with a Dutch background (CAIDE: +0.66-1.35; LIBRA: +0.66-1.43; ANU-ADRI: +2.75-7.25). CAIDE estimated an absolute 20-year incident dementia risk of 2.6% for Dutch, 3.4% for South-Asian Surinamese, 3.6% for Turkish, 3.7% for Moroccan, 3.7% for African Surinamese and 4.5% for Ghanaian populations. Differences were greater when removing age from scores (CAIDE +0.89-2.22; ANU-ADRI +3.03-8.20), implying that this higher risk score is independent of age.

Conclusion: Migrant populations had higher dementia risk scores than Dutch natives. Validation of these scores in migrant populations is warranted. If replicated, ethnicity should be considered when estimating dementia risk and developing preventive strategies for high-risk populations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信