Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Read this before the numbers: association is not causation

Almost everything on this page is an association, observed in groups of people, not a proven cause. Very few dementia risk factors have been tested by randomised controlled trial — the study design that can actually show cause and effect. Most of the numbers below come from cohort studies: researchers measured something about a large group of people, then watched who developed dementia years later. That can be misleading in both directions — a factor can look protective because healthier people happen to do it, or look harmful because early, undiagnosed dementia already changed someone's behaviour before the study began (reverse causation).

A gene is not a diagnosis, and a risk factor is not a verdict. Most people who carry even the highest-risk gene variant on this page never develop Alzheimer's, and people with none of the risk factors below still do. Nothing here is medical advice; decisions about testing or treatment belong with a clinician.

How this page is ordered: genetic and demographic risk (fixed, not modifiable) is shown first and kept visually separate throughout. Modifiable risk factors are then ranked by the size of their modelled population-attributable fraction (PAF) — the share of dementia cases a model attributes to that factor — from the Lancet Commission's 2024 report, the largest published synthesis of this evidence. Factors the Commission did not formally model (diet, general physical activity, individual drugs tested in randomised trials) sit in their own section afterward, ranked by evidence strength rather than a PAF, because no PAF exists for them.

How to read the labels: Measured counted, surveyed or written in law. Modelled estimate produced by a statistical model — an estimate, not a count. Basis not stated the source did not say which.

15 of the 31 records behind this page are model estimates, not measurements. They are produced by statistical models — projections, small-area estimates such as CDC PLACES, Global Burden of Disease figures, pooled meta-analyses, or cost models. A model estimate can be the best number available and still be wrong for any particular person, county or year.

Each one carries a Modelled estimate label where it appears.

Genetic and demographic risk — not modifiable

These do not change with lifestyle. They are listed first, and never mixed into the ranking below, so a reader cannot come away thinking a gene is something to "manage" the way a blood-pressure reading is.

Deterministic mutations: cause dementia directly, not just raise its odds

A handful of rare mutations do not raise a probability — they cause early-onset Alzheimer's directly, inherited in an autosomal-dominant pattern (a child of a carrier has roughly a 50% chance of inheriting it), with near-complete penetrance. These are fundamentally different from everything else on this page and are never expressed as an odds ratio here for that reason.

APP

61 variants classified 'AD : Pathogenic' + 9 'Likely Pathogenic' (155 entries total, 18 uncertain significance)

Autosomal dominant, typically early-onset, near-complete penetrance for pathogenic variants (Alzforum classification)

PSEN1

192 variants classified 'AD : Pathogenic' + 100 'Likely Pathogenic' (400 entries total, 39 uncertain significance)

Autosomal dominant, typically early-onset, near-complete penetrance for pathogenic variants (Alzforum classification)

PSEN2

5 variants classified 'AD : Pathogenic' + 17 'Likely Pathogenic' (97 entries total, 26 uncertain significance)

Autosomal dominant, typically early-onset, near-complete penetrance for pathogenic variants (Alzforum classification)

Down syndrome (trisomy 21) causes a related but distinct pattern: the extra copy of chromosome 21 (which carries the APP gene) leads to lifelong APP overexpression and near-universal Alzheimer's brain pathology by late-middle-age.

Common genetic and family-history risk: raises odds, does not determine the outcome

APOE4 genotype (dose-dependent)

Basis not stated Not modifiable

One copy (heterozygous, e3/e4): OR 3.2 (95% CI 2.8-3.8); two copies (homozygous, e4/e4): OR 14.9 (95% CI 10.8-20.6), both vs. e3/e3 reference

Carrying one copy of the APOE4 allele roughly triples Alzheimer's odds; carrying two copies (homozygous) raises odds nearly 15-fold relative to the common e3/e3 genotype, a clear gene-dosage effect. The e2/e3 genotype was mildly protective (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.5-0.8).

Landmark, still most-cited meta-analysis; not included in the Lancet Commission's modifiable-risk PAF model since APOE4 is non-modifiable. Effect size varies substantially by ancestry: stronger in Japanese populations (e4/e4 OR 33.1) and weaker in African American/Hispanic populations in the same meta-analysis.

Source: Farrer LA, Cupples LA, Haines JL, et al., JAMA 1997 (pooled meta-analysis, 40 research teams, 5,930 AD cases, 8,607 controls) · 1997

Family history of Alzheimer's/dementia

Basis not stated Not modifiable

RR 1.73 (95% CI 1.59-1.87) for 1+ affected first-degree relative; RR 3.98 (95% CI 3.26-4.82) for 2+ affected first-degree relatives

Risk climbs steeply with the number of affected close relatives; risk elevation extends even to second- and third-degree relatives, indicating a broad polygenic/inherited contribution beyond APOE4 alone.

Utah-specific founder population (largely European ancestry), which may limit generalizability. The reported RR for 3+ affected first-degree relatives (2.48, 95% CI 1.07-4.89) is numerically lower than for 2+ relatives, an instability the study authors themselves note as likely due to small subgroup size.

Source: Cannon-Albright LA, et al., Neurology 2019 (Utah Population Database, 270,818 individuals, 4,436 AD deaths) · 2019

Down syndrome (trisomy 21)

Basis not stated Not modifiable

Symptomatic Alzheimer's prevalence reaches 90-100% by the seventh decade of life; lifetime risk of AD >90%

Trisomy 21 causes near-universal Alzheimer's brain pathology and very high rates of clinical dementia by late-middle-age, because the extra copy of chromosome 21 causes lifelong overexpression of the amyloid precursor protein (APP) gene. Among a cohort of 388 adults with Down syndrome, median age of Alzheimer's-dementia diagnosis was 53.7 years and median age of prodromal-AD diagnosis was 50.2 years.

The strongest known genetic risk factor for early-onset Alzheimer's in people who survive to middle age. Figures reflect people with Down syndrome who survive into adulthood; onset ages are typically decades earlier than late-onset Alzheimer's in the general population.

Source: Fortea J, Vilaplana E, Carmona-Iragui M, et al., The Lancet 2020 · 2020

Genetic and family-history risk, ranked

Odds ratios / relative risks for the strongest common genetic and familial signals, none of which are modifiable. PSEN1, PSEN2, APP and Down syndrome are not on this chart: they cause disease deterministically rather than raising odds, so an odds ratio would misrepresent them (see the causal-mutation panel above).

Genetic and family-history effect sizes on Alzheimer's risk, rankedAPOE ε4/ε4 (two copies), 14.9 times the reference group’s odds; Family history, 2+ relatives, 4 times the reference group’s odds; APOE ε3/ε4 (one copy), 3.2 times the reference group’s odds; TREM2 R47H variant, 2.4 times the reference group’s odds; Family history, 1+ relative, 1.7 times the reference group’s odds; TREM2 R62H variant, 1.4 times the reference group’s odds.0×5×10×15×no extra riskAPOE ε4/ε4 (two copies)14.9×Family history, 2+ relatives4×APOE ε3/ε4 (one copy)3.2×TREM2 R47H variant2.4×Family history, 1+ relative1.7×TREM2 R62H variant1.4×Odds ratios (APOE, family history) and odds ratios per risk allele (TREM2) are not directlyinterchangeable, but all compare a group to a reference group without the variant.

This chart is wider than your screen — drag it sideways, or open the table underneath.

Sources: APOE and family history — Farrer LA et al., JAMA 1997; Cannon-Albright LA et al., Neurology 2019. TREM2 — Bellenguez C et al., Nat Genet 2022 (largest available GWAS; smaller early studies reported higher TREM2 odds ratios that later shrank in bigger samples, a pattern called winner's-curse shrinkage).
Every number in this chart, as a table
Variant / historyEffect sizeSource
APOE ε4/ε4 (two copies)14.9×Farrer LA, Cupples LA, Haines JL, et al., JAMA 1997 (pooled meta-analysis, 40 research teams, 5,930 AD cases, 8,607 controls)
Family history, 2+ relatives4×Cannon-Albright LA, et al., Neurology 2019 (Utah Population Database, 270,818 individuals, 4,436 AD deaths)
APOE ε3/ε4 (one copy)3.2×Farrer LA, Cupples LA, Haines JL, et al., JAMA 1997 (pooled meta-analysis, 40 research teams, 5,930 AD cases, 8,607 controls)
TREM2 R47H variant2.4×Bellenguez et al. 2022, Nat Genet (EADB/IGAP/UKB stage 1)
Family history, 1+ relative1.7×Cannon-Albright LA, et al., Neurology 2019 (Utah Population Database, 270,818 individuals, 4,436 AD deaths)
TREM2 R62H variant1.4×Bellenguez et al. 2022, Nat Genet (EADB/IGAP/UKB stage 1)

Demographic risk

Age

Modelled estimate Not modifiable

Prevalence 5.1% (ages 65-74), 13.2% (ages 75-84), 33.4% (ages 85+)

Age is the single strongest predictor of Alzheimer's/dementia risk; prevalence increases roughly exponentially after age 65, more than doubling with each successive decade.

Source: Alzheimer's Association, 2025 Alzheimer's Disease Facts and Figures · 2025

Sex (being female)

Basis not stated Not modifiable

HR 1.12 (95% CI 1.02-1.23), meta-analysis of 21 cohorts (n=29,850); lifetime risk at age 65: women 24.6% vs. men 15.5% (all-cause dementia)

Women show meaningfully higher lifetime dementia risk than men in Western cohort data, but the Lancet Commission attributes this substantially to women's greater life expectancy and historically lower educational attainment rather than to a clearly established sex-specific biological mechanism. The Commission's own text notes findings on sex differences are inconsistent across countries.

Source: Lancet Commission 2024 report; Chene G, et al., Alzheimer's & Dementia 2015 (Framingham Heart Study) · 2015

Modifiable risk — the 14 Lancet Commission factors

Source: Livingston G et al., "Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2024 report of the Lancet Commission," The Lancet 2024;404(10452):572-628. The 45% and 40% figures are the Commission's own combined estimates — not a sum you can recreate by adding the individual percentages below, because the factors overlap and the combination formula adjusts for that ("communality").

The 14 modifiable risk factors, ranked by modelled share of cases

Weighted population-attributable fraction (PAF): the modelled share of dementia cases a factor is associated with across a whole population, colour-coded by the life stage the Commission assigns it to.

The 14 modifiable dementia risk factors, ranked by modelled share of casesHearing loss, Midlife, 7% of cases; High LDL cholesterol, Midlife, 6.9% of cases; Social isolation, Later life, 4.6% of cases; Less education, Early life, 4.5% of cases; Depression, Midlife, 3% of cases; Traumatic brain injury, Midlife, 2.9% of cases; Air pollution, Later life, 2.6% of cases; Physical inactivity, Midlife, 2.4% of cases; Smoking, Midlife, 2.3% of cases; Diabetes, Midlife, 2.3% of cases; Hypertension, Midlife, 2.2% of cases; Untreated vision loss, Later life, 2.2% of cases; Obesity, Midlife, 1.4% of cases; Excessive alcohol consumption, Midlife, 1% of cases.0%2%4%6%8%Hearing loss7%High LDL cholesterol6.9%Social isolation4.6%Less education4.5%Depression3%Traumatic brain injury2.9%Air pollution2.6%Physical inactivity2.4%Smoking2.3%Diabetes2.3%Hypertension2.2%Untreated vision loss2.2%Obesity1.4%Excessive alcohol consumption1%Early lifeMidlifeLater lifeWeighted population attributable fraction, Lancet Commission 2024 Table 1. Shares aremodelled and overlap, so they are not meant to be added up.

This chart is wider than your screen — drag it sideways, or open the table underneath.

Source: Livingston G et al., Lancet Commission on dementia prevention, intervention and care, 2024 report, Table 1 (Lancet 2024;404(10452):572-628). These are modelled estimates of an eliminated risk factor's effect on a whole population, not measurements, and not a personal-risk calculator.
Every number in this chart, as a table
Risk factorLife stageWeighted PAFEffect sizeEvidence
Hearing lossMidlife7%RR 1.37 (95% CI 1.00-1.87); a separate larger analysis gives HR 1.35 (95% CI 1.26-1.45)high
High LDL cholesterolMidlife6.9%RR 1.3 (95% CI 1.3-1.4); n=1,189,090 study of LDL >3 mmol/L, HR 1.33 (95% CI 1.26-1.41); each 1 mmol/L increase in LDL raised risk 8% (95% CI 1.03-1.14)moderate
Social isolationLater life4.6%RR 1.6 (95% CI 1.3-1.8); systematic review of 8 studies (n=15,762), RR 1.57 (95% CI 1.32-1.85)moderate
Less educationEarly life4.5%RR 1.6 (95% CI 1.3-2.0)high
DepressionMidlife3%RR 2.2 (95% CI 1.7-3.0) per Lancet Commission's own meta-analysis; UK Biobank HR 1.51 (95% CI 1.38-1.63)high
Traumatic brain injuryMidlife2.9%RR 1.7 (95% CI 1.4-1.9); meta-analysis of 21 studies (n=8,684,485), OR 1.81 (95% CI 1.53-2.14)high
Air pollutionLater life2.6%RR 1.1 (95% CI 1.1-1.1); US cohort of >18 million, black carbon (PM2.5 constituent) HR 1.12 (95% CI 1.11-1.14) per 1 ug/m3 incrementmoderate
Physical inactivityMidlife2.4%RR 1.2 (95% CI 1.2-1.3)moderate
SmokingMidlife2.3%RR 1.30 (95% CI 1.18-1.45); UK Biobank HR 1.7 (95% CI 1.2-2.5) for smokers under 50 at baselinehigh
DiabetesMidlife2.3%RR 1.7 (95% CI 1.6-1.8); each 5-year-earlier age of type-2-diabetes onset raised risk HR 1.24 (95% CI 1.06-1.46) up to age-70 onsethigh
HypertensionMidlife2.2%HR 1.42 (95% CI 1.15-1.76) for untreated hypertension vs. healthy controls; SPRINT MIND trial: probable-dementia HR 0.83 (95% CI 0.67-1.04, not significant), MCI HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.69-0.95)moderate
Untreated vision lossLater life2.2%RR 1.5 (95% CI 1.4-1.6); meta-analysis of 14 prospective cohorts (n=6,204,827), pooled RR 1.47 (95% CI 1.36-1.60)moderate
ObesityMidlife1.4%RR 1.31 (95% CI 1.02-1.68), meta-analysis of 14 studies (n=77,890); central obesity (waist circumference) HR 1.10 (95% CI 1.05-1.15)moderate
Excessive alcohol consumptionMidlife1%RR 1.2 (95% CI 1.0-1.5); heavier (>21 UK units/week) vs. lighter drinking, HR 1.22 (95% CI 1.01-1.48), IPD meta-analysis n=131,415moderate

Hearing loss

Modelled estimate Midlife Can be changed
7% of cases attributed to this factor (modelled)
  • RR 1.37 (95% CI 1.00-1.87); a separate larger analysis gives HR 1.35 (95% CI 1.26-1.45)
  • Evidence: High

Untreated hearing loss is one of the single largest contributors to dementia risk in the Lancet Commission's model, plausibly via reduced auditory/cognitive stimulation and social withdrawal. Each additional category of hearing-loss severity raised risk by about 16% (95% CI 1.07-1.27) in the cited literature; hearing-aid use appears to partly offset the excess risk.

Table 1 RR 1.4 (95% CI 1.0-1.9), prevalence 59.0%, weighted PAF 7.0% (rounded 7%). Observational; reverse causation (subclinical dementia causing perceived hearing decline) not fully excluded.

Source: Lancet Commission 2024 report (Table 1, new pooled meta-analysis of 6 cohorts, n=666,370) · 2024

High LDL cholesterol

Modelled estimate Midlife Can be changed
6.9% of cases attributed to this factor (modelled)
  • RR 1.3 (95% CI 1.3-1.4); n=1,189,090 study of LDL >3 mmol/L, HR 1.33 (95% CI 1.26-1.41); each 1 mmol/L increase in LDL raised risk 8% (95% CI 1.03-1.14)
  • Evidence: Moderate

Elevated LDL cholesterol in midlife (not late life) is newly recognized (2024) as a dementia risk factor. Statin use was associated with lower dementia risk (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.75-0.86) versus untreated high cholesterol in a 36-cohort meta-analysis, though a Cochrane review of late-life statin RCTs found no benefit.

New in the 2024 report. Prevalence estimate (76.5%) is drawn from a single Norwegian cohort (HUNT study, ~37,000 participants aged 45+) because the Commission could not find a worldwide LDL prevalence estimate -- the weakest prevalence input of the 14 factors, per the Commission's own text. Weighted PAF 6.9% (rounded 7%).

Source: Lancet Commission 2024 report (Table 1) · 2024

Social isolation

Modelled estimate Later life Can be changed
4.6% of cases attributed to this factor (modelled)
  • RR 1.6 (95% CI 1.3-1.8); systematic review of 8 studies (n=15,762), RR 1.57 (95% CI 1.32-1.85)
  • Evidence: Moderate

Infrequent social contact in later life raises dementia risk, plausibly through loss of cognitive stimulation and increased stress/inflammation. A related but distinct construct, loneliness, shows RR estimates of 1.26-1.58 across separate reviews.

Prevalence 24.0%, weighted PAF 4.6% (rounded 5%). Studies with under 4 years of follow-up are especially prone to reverse causation (preclinical dementia causing social withdrawal, not the reverse).

Source: Lancet Commission 2024 report (Table 1) · 2024

Less education

Modelled estimate Early life Can be changed
4.5% of cases attributed to this factor (modelled)
  • RR 1.6 (95% CI 1.3-2.0)
  • Evidence: High

Fewer years of formal education is linked to higher dementia risk, likely because education builds 'cognitive reserve' -- the brain's capacity to compensate for pathology. A Latin American meta-analysis of 31 studies found dementia prevalence of 21.4% in people with no education versus 9.9% in those with at least one year of schooling.

Weighted PAF 4.5% (rounded 5%); prevalence of low education used in the model was 23.2%. Confounded by socioeconomic status, which the Commission partly adjusts for via its 'communality' weighting.

Source: Lancet Commission on dementia prevention, intervention, and care, 2024 report (Table 1) · 2024

Depression

Modelled estimate Midlife Can be changed
3% of cases attributed to this factor (modelled)
  • RR 2.2 (95% CI 1.7-3.0) per Lancet Commission's own meta-analysis; UK Biobank HR 1.51 (95% CI 1.38-1.63)
  • Evidence: High

Depression at any life stage is associated with raised dementia risk, with the largest relative risk seen for early/midlife-onset depression. Effectively treated depression (UK Biobank) was associated with a lower risk, HR 0.62 (95% CI 0.53-0.73), than untreated depression.

2024 report reclassified depression from 'later life' to 'midlife' category. Table 1 RR 2.2 (95% CI 1.7-3.0), prevalence 7.2%, weighted PAF 3.0% (rounded 3%). Bidirectional relationship: depression can be a prodromal symptom of dementia rather than purely causal.

Source: Lancet Commission 2024 report (Table 1, new meta-analysis of 7 studies) · 2024

Traumatic brain injury

Modelled estimate Midlife Can be changed
2.9% of cases attributed to this factor (modelled)
  • RR 1.7 (95% CI 1.4-1.9); meta-analysis of 21 studies (n=8,684,485), OR 1.81 (95% CI 1.53-2.14)
  • Evidence: High

A history of traumatic brain injury, including single mild concussions, measurably raises later dementia risk. Younger age at injury and male sex are associated with higher risk; contact-sport cohorts (e.g., professional soccer players) show elevated neurodegenerative-disease mortality.

Prevalence 12.1%, weighted PAF 2.9% (rounded 3%). TBI risk clusters with other risk behaviors (alcohol use, low education); the effect is attenuated but not eliminated after adjustment for confounders.

Source: Lancet Commission 2024 report (Table 1) · 2024

Air pollution

Modelled estimate Later life Can be changed
2.6% of cases attributed to this factor (modelled)
  • RR 1.1 (95% CI 1.1-1.1); US cohort of >18 million, black carbon (PM2.5 constituent) HR 1.12 (95% CI 1.11-1.14) per 1 ug/m3 increment
  • Evidence: Moderate

Long-term exposure to particulate air pollution, especially black carbon, raises dementia risk. Quasi-experimental evidence from air-quality improvement policies in France found a 12.2 ug/m3 reduction in PM2.5 was associated with lower dementia risk (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76-0.95), supporting a reversible, plausibly causal relationship.

Prevalence 75.0% (i.e., most of the world's population has meaningful exposure), weighted PAF 2.6% (rounded 3%). Individual pollutant components are not fully disentangled and exposure measurement is imprecise.

Source: Lancet Commission 2024 report (Table 1) · 2024

Physical inactivity

Modelled estimate Midlife Can be changed
2.4% of cases attributed to this factor (modelled)
  • RR 1.2 (95% CI 1.2-1.3)
  • Evidence: Moderate

Physical inactivity in midlife/later life raises dementia risk; conversely, maintaining an individually optimal activity level over decades was protective (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58-0.97) compared with persistent inactivity in a cohort followed a median 24.5 years. See also the separate 'physical-activity' protective-factor entry.

2024 report reclassified physical inactivity from 'later life' to 'midlife' category. Prevalence 27.5%, weighted PAF 2.4% (rounded 2%). Reverse causation risk: preclinical dementia often reduces activity levels before diagnosis.

Source: Lancet Commission 2024 report (Table 1) · 2024

Smoking

Modelled estimate Midlife Can be changed
2.3% of cases attributed to this factor (modelled)
  • RR 1.30 (95% CI 1.18-1.45); UK Biobank HR 1.7 (95% CI 1.2-2.5) for smokers under 50 at baseline
  • Evidence: High

Current midlife smoking substantially raises dementia risk; former smokers show little to no excess risk, suggesting quitting reduces risk at essentially any age. The 2024 Lancet Commission reclassified smoking from a late-life to a midlife risk factor based on newer evidence.

Table 1 RR 1.3 (95% CI 1.2-1.4), prevalence 22.3%, weighted PAF 2.3% (rounded 2%).

Source: Lancet Commission 2024 report (Table 1); Zhong et al. meta-analysis, 37 studies · 2024

Diabetes

Modelled estimate Midlife Can be changed
2.3% of cases attributed to this factor (modelled)
  • RR 1.7 (95% CI 1.6-1.8); each 5-year-earlier age of type-2-diabetes onset raised risk HR 1.24 (95% CI 1.06-1.46) up to age-70 onset
  • Evidence: High

Diabetes diagnosed in midlife substantially raises dementia risk via vascular damage, CNS insulin resistance, and inflammation. The Commission explicitly classifies diabetes as a midlife risk factor and notes its effect is uncertain when onset occurs late in life.

2024 report reclassified diabetes from 'later life' to 'midlife' category. Prevalence 9.3%, weighted PAF 2.3% (rounded 2%). Some glucose-lowering drug classes (SGLT2 inhibitors, GLP-1 agonists) show associated risk reduction in observational data, but causality is unproven.

Source: Lancet Commission 2024 report (Table 1) · 2024

Hypertension

Modelled estimate Midlife Can be changed
2.2% of cases attributed to this factor (modelled)
  • HR 1.42 (95% CI 1.15-1.76) for untreated hypertension vs. healthy controls; SPRINT MIND trial: probable-dementia HR 0.83 (95% CI 0.67-1.04, not significant), MCI HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.69-0.95)
  • Evidence: Moderate

Midlife hypertension raises dementia risk, and treating it appears protective against cognitive decline and MCI. The flagship SPRINT MIND randomized trial found intensive blood-pressure control significantly reduced MCI but its dementia-specific endpoint narrowly missed statistical significance, likely because the trial was stopped early and underpowered for that outcome.

Table 1 RR 1.2 (95% CI 1.1-1.4), prevalence 31.1%, weighted PAF 2.2% (rounded 2%). Blood pressure trajectories tend to drop shortly before dementia onset, complicating late-life measurement.

Source: Lancet Commission 2024 report (Table 1); Williamson et al., SPRINT MIND, JAMA 2019 · 2019

Untreated vision loss

Modelled estimate Later life Can be changed
2.2% of cases attributed to this factor (modelled)
  • RR 1.5 (95% CI 1.4-1.6); meta-analysis of 14 prospective cohorts (n=6,204,827), pooled RR 1.47 (95% CI 1.36-1.60)
  • Evidence: Moderate

Vision impairment -- much of it correctable -- was newly added as a dementia risk factor in the Lancet Commission's 2024 report. Cataract surgery specifically was associated with lower subsequent dementia risk (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.62-0.83) versus unoperated cataracts, suggesting a genuinely modifiable pathway; diabetic retinopathy also raised risk (HR 1.34, 95% CI 1.11-1.61), while glaucoma and age-related macular degeneration showed no significant association.

New in the 2024 report (not in the 2020 list). Prevalence 12.7%, weighted PAF 2.2% (rounded 2%). Global prevalence estimate skews toward low- and middle-income countries where untreated vision loss is more common.

Source: Lancet Commission 2024 report (Table 1) · 2024

Obesity

Modelled estimate Midlife Can be changed
1.4% of cases attributed to this factor (modelled)
  • RR 1.31 (95% CI 1.02-1.68), meta-analysis of 14 studies (n=77,890); central obesity (waist circumference) HR 1.10 (95% CI 1.05-1.15)
  • Evidence: Moderate

Midlife obesity raises dementia risk, but the relationship is complicated near the time of diagnosis: obesity measured within about 10 years of dementia onset can appear protective because of pre-diagnostic weight loss (reverse causation).

Table 1 RR 1.3 (95% CI 1.0-1.7), prevalence 13.0%, weighted PAF 1.4% (rounded 1%). Heavily confounded with diabetes, hypertension, and physical inactivity.

Source: Lancet Commission 2024 report (Table 1) · 2024

Excessive alcohol consumption

Modelled estimate Midlife Can be changed
1% of cases attributed to this factor (modelled)
  • RR 1.2 (95% CI 1.0-1.5); heavier (>21 UK units/week) vs. lighter drinking, HR 1.22 (95% CI 1.01-1.48), IPD meta-analysis n=131,415
  • Evidence: Moderate

Heavy/excessive alcohol use in midlife raises dementia risk in a dose-dependent way; a South Korean cohort of nearly 4 million found cutting back from heavy to moderate drinking lowered risk (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.86-0.99).

Prevalence 13.3%, weighted PAF 1.0% (rounded 1%). 'Non-drinker' comparison groups are often contaminated by former heavy drinkers who quit due to illness, producing a misleading J-shaped risk curve in some studies.

Source: Lancet Commission 2024 report (Table 1) · 2024

Other studied factors — not in the Commission's 14

These are things that have been studied for a link to dementia risk but are either protective, not formally modelled by the Commission, or come from a single randomised trial rather than a pooled meta-analysis. Several are honest negatives: a change that did nothing when it was actually tested is exactly as useful to know as one that worked. Ranked by evidence strength, not by whether the finding was positive.

Intensive (systolic <120 mm Hg) vs standard (<140 mm Hg) blood-pressure treatment - SPRINT MIND trial

Basis not stated No significant effect

Probable dementia HR 0.83 (95% CI 0.67-1.04), 7.2 vs 8.6 cases per 1,000 person-years (not significant); MCI HR 0.81 (0.69-0.95), 14.6 vs 18.3 per 1,000 person-years; MCI or probable dementia HR 0.85 (0.74-0.97)

  • Evidence: High

The only large randomised trial of blood-pressure targets with adjudicated dementia as the primary cognitive outcome found no significant reduction in probable dementia with intensive control, although mild cognitive impairment and the combined MCI-or-dementia outcome were significantly reduced. The trial was stopped early for cardiovascular benefit, so it accrued fewer dementia cases than planned and may have been underpowered for the dementia endpoint.

PMID 30688979; PMC6439590; NCT01206062. 9,361 adults aged >=50 with hypertension, no diabetes or prior stroke, 102 US/Puerto Rico sites; intensive n=4,678, standard n=4,683; mean age 67.9; 35.6% women; 91.5% had >=1 follow-up cognitive assessment; median intervention 3.34 years, median follow-up 5.11 years; 149 vs 176 probable-dementia cases. Recorded as a null primary result with a significant secondary (MCI) result. Complements the observational 'hypertension' record.

Source: SPRINT MIND Investigators for the SPRINT Research Group; Williamson JD, Pajewski NM, Auchus AP, et al. Effect of Intensive vs Standard Blood Pressure Control on Probable Dementia: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2019;321(6):553-561 · 2019

Low-dose aspirin (100 mg daily) in healthy older adults - ASPREE trial

Basis not stated No significant effect

All dementia triggers HR 1.03 (95% CI 0.91-1.17); probable AD HR 0.96 (0.74-1.24); MCI HR 1.12 (0.92-1.37); cognitive change over time similar in both arms

  • Evidence: High

In a large placebo-controlled trial of community-dwelling adults aged 70+ (US minorities 65+) free of cardiovascular disease and dementia, daily low-dose aspirin did not reduce incident dementia, probable Alzheimer's disease, MCI or cognitive decline over a median 4.7 years. Aspirin is therefore not a dementia-prevention strategy in healthy older people.

PMID 32213642; PMC7455352; NCT01038583. 19,114 participants, US and Australia; 964 triggered dementia assessment; 575 adjudicated dementia cases (DSM-IV), 41% clinically probable AD. Class II evidence per the journal's classification. Deliberately recorded as a null finding.

Source: Ryan J, Storey E, Murray AM, et al. Randomized placebo-controlled trial of the effects of aspirin on dementia and cognitive decline. Neurology 2020;95(3):e320-e331 · 2020

Ginkgo biloba extract (120 mg twice daily) - Ginkgo Evaluation of Memory (GEM) trial

Basis not stated No significant effect

All-cause dementia HR 1.12 (95% CI 0.94-1.33; P=.21); Alzheimer's disease HR 1.16 (0.97-1.39; P=.11); progression from MCI to dementia HR 1.13 (0.85-1.50; P=.39); dementia rate 3.3 vs 2.9 per 100 person-years (ginkgo vs placebo)

  • Evidence: High

The largest placebo-controlled trial of Ginkgo biloba, in 3,069 community volunteers aged 75+ with normal cognition or MCI followed for a median 6.1 years, found no reduction in all-cause dementia or Alzheimer's disease; point estimates were, if anything, slightly unfavourable. Ginkgo remains widely sold for memory despite this null result.

PMID 19017911; PMC2823569; NCT00010803. 5 US academic centres, 2000-2008; ginkgo n=1,545, placebo n=1,524; 2,587 normal cognition and 482 MCI at entry; 523 incident dementia cases (277 ginkgo, 246 placebo), 92% possible/probable AD or AD with vascular disease; dropout/loss to follow-up 6.3%; similar adverse-event profiles. Null finding recorded deliberately.

Source: DeKosky ST, Williamson JD, Fitzpatrick AL, et al. Ginkgo biloba for prevention of dementia: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2008;300(19):2253-2262 · 2008

Mediterranean diet adherence (protective)

Basis not stated Decreases risk

HR 0.89 (95% CI 0.83-0.95) for dementia (10 studies); HR 0.70 (95% CI 0.60-0.82) for Alzheimer's disease specifically (9 cohorts)

  • Evidence: Moderate

Higher adherence to a Mediterranean-style diet is associated with an 11% lower risk of dementia overall and a 30% lower risk of Alzheimer's disease specifically in pooled cohort data spanning 2000-2024.

Purely observational; no large randomized controlled trial has confirmed causality for dementia as a primary endpoint. Residual confounding by socioeconomic status, education, and general healthy-lifestyle clustering is likely.

Source: Meta-analysis of 23 studies, 2000-2024 · 2024

Physical activity (protective)

Basis not stated Decreases risk

HR 0.75 (95% CI 0.58-0.97) for maintaining an individually optimal activity level vs. persistent inactivity

  • Evidence: Moderate

Sustained physical activity across adulthood is associated with roughly a quarter reduction in dementia risk compared with persistent inactivity, in a cohort of 29,826 people followed a median 24.5 years with activity assessed twice a decade apart. This is the protective mirror of the 'physical-inactivity' risk-factor entry.

Same reverse-causation concern as inactivity: declining activity can itself be an early, pre-diagnostic dementia symptom, which may inflate the apparent protective effect of staying active.

Source: Lancet Commission 2024 report (cited cohort study) · 2024

Antioxidant supplements (vitamin E, selenium, or both) - PREADViSE trial in asymptomatic older men

Basis not stated No significant effect

Adjusted HR vs placebo: vitamin E 0.88 (95% CI 0.64-1.20); selenium 0.83 (0.60-1.13); combination 1.00 (0.75-1.35); dementia incidence 4.4% overall (325/7,338), not different across arms

  • Evidence: Moderate

Neither vitamin E nor selenium, alone or together, prevented dementia in 7,540 men aged 60+ enrolled through the SELECT prostate-cancer prevention trial. The randomised phase (2002-2009) converted to an observational cohort after SELECT closed for futility, which weakens the design, but the result is consistently null.

PMID 28319243; PMC5506489. Mean baseline age 67.5 (SD 5.3); 52.2% college-educated; 10.0% Black; 6.7% Hispanic; 130 SELECT sites; 3,786 continued into the cohort phase (Sep 2009-May 2015); modified intent-to-treat Cox models. Men only; dementia ascertained by two-stage screen plus record review, not universal clinical evaluation. Null finding recorded deliberately.

Source: Kryscio RJ, Abner EL, Caban-Holt A, et al. Association of Antioxidant Supplement Use and Dementia in the Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease by Vitamin E and Selenium Trial (PREADViSE). JAMA Neurol 2017;74(5):567-573 · 2017

Menopause hormone therapy (oestrogen-only or combined) in peri-/post-menopausal women

Basis not stated No significant effect

No significant association between MHT use and incident MCI or dementia in random-effects meta-analysis of 10 studies (1 RCT, 9 observational; 1,016,055 participants); subgroups by timing, duration and type also non-significant (pooled point estimate not given in abstract)

  • Evidence: Moderate

A 2025 systematic review and meta-analysis found no evidence that menopause hormone therapy either raises or lowers dementia risk, and no effect of timing, duration or formulation. The authors conclude MHT should be prescribed for its other benefits and risks, not for dementia prevention. Certainty of evidence ranged from moderate to very low, and no study addressed premature ovarian insufficiency or testosterone.

PMID 41448220; PROSPERO CRD42025639384; primary studies searched 1 Jan 2000-20 Oct 2025; risk of bias via RoB 2 / ROBINS-E; GRADE. Funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada. The abstract reports the null result qualitatively; the numeric pooled RR was not in the source text we have, so the effect-size entry states the finding without inventing a point estimate.

Source: Melville M, He L, Desai R, et al. Menopause hormone therapy and risk of mild cognitive impairment or dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Healthy Longev 2025;6(12):100803 · 2025

High-school completion or above, and occupational complexity (COSMIC 9-cohort coordinated analysis)

Basis not stated Decreases risk

Pooled survival time ratio 1.26 (95% CI 1.09-1.47) for dementia-free survival with high-school completion or above vs less than high school (total effect); natural direct effect 1.18 (1.01-1.36); indirect effect via occupational complexity 1.06 (1.02-1.09); 28% of the education effect mediated by occupational complexity

  • Evidence: Moderate

Across 10,195 older adults in nine cohorts from six countries, completing high school lengthened dementia-free survival by about a quarter, and adult occupational complexity independently added protection, explaining roughly a quarter of the education effect. A threshold pattern was seen: finishing high school mattered, with little extra gain from further education. Adds the adult-life occupation pathway to the 'less-education' record.

PMID 34776437; PMC8748312 (full text loaded). Median baseline age 74.1 (range 58-103); accelerated failure time models per cohort then meta-analysed; cumulative dementia incidence across cohorts 3%-22%. Pooled values quoted are from the mediation-analysis table (Table 5) of the full text; occupational complexity estimates in Table 4 varied by cohort (e.g., EAS Black and LEILA75+ protective) and the pooled Table 3/4 rows were in figures not captured as text.

Source: Hyun J, Hall CB, Katz MJ, et al. Education, Occupational Complexity, and Incident Dementia: A COSMIC Collaborative Cohort Study. J Alzheimers Dis 2022;85(1):179-196 · 2022

Statin use (observational cohorts and case-control studies)

Basis not stated Decreases risk

Pooled OR 0.80 (95% CI 0.75-0.86) for dementia (36 studies) and OR 0.68 (0.56-0.81) for Alzheimer's disease (21 studies) in statin users vs non-users; men OR 0.86 (0.81-0.92) and women OR 0.86 (0.81-0.92); high-potency statins 20% vs low-potency 16% dementia risk reduction (P=0.05 for heterogeneity)

  • Evidence: Low

Pooled observational evidence associates statin use with about 20% lower odds of dementia and 32% lower odds of Alzheimer's disease, with no difference between lipophilic and hydrophilic statins. Because this is observational (healthy-user and indication bias are likely) and no adequately designed randomised trial exists, the authors frame it as absence of neurocognitive harm plus a possible favourable effect, not proof of prevention.

PMID 34871380. Search to January 2021; restricted maximum-likelihood random-effects model. Evidence strength set to 'low' because all included studies are observational and the authors call for ad hoc RCTs. Contrast with the 'high-ldl-cholesterol' record (LDL as a risk factor) - statin benefit does not follow automatically from that association.

Source: Olmastroni E, Molari G, De Beni N, et al. Statin use and risk of dementia or Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2022;29(5):804-814 · 2022

Poor periodontal health (periodontitis, tooth loss, deep pockets, alveolar bone loss)

Basis not stated Increases risk

Dementia HR 1.21 (95% CI 1.07-1.38; 23 longitudinal studies); cognitive decline OR 1.23 (1.05-1.44; 24 studies); tooth loss alone: dementia HR 1.13 (1.04-1.23), cognitive decline OR 1.23 (1.09-1.39); complete tooth loss dementia HR 1.23 (1.05-1.45)

  • Evidence: Low

Longitudinal studies link poor periodontal health and tooth loss to roughly 20% higher dementia risk, but the review authors rate the evidence low quality, highly heterogeneous, and 'at least partly due to reverse causality' (early cognitive decline worsens oral care). Not among the Lancet Commission's 14 factors.

PMID 36073186; PMC9826143. Five databases searched to April 2022; 47 studies included (24 cognitive decline, 23 dementia); random-effects pooling. Partial tooth loss OR 1.50 (1.02-2.23) for cognitive decline. Recorded with the authors' caution about reverse causality.

Source: Asher S, Stephen R, Mantyla P, Suominen AL, Solomon A. Periodontal health, cognitive decline, and dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. J Am Geriatr Soc 2022;70(9):2695-2709 · 2022

Light-to-moderate alcohol intake vs abstention (dose-response, longitudinal studies)

Basis not stated Decreases risk

Dementia: RR 0.92 (95% CI 0.88-0.96) at 1-17.5 g/day and RR 1.23 (1.09-1.35) at >17.5 g/day vs 0 g/day (J-shaped; lowest risk ~15 g/day); cognitive dysfunction: RR 0.97 (0.95-0.99) at 1-30.5 g/day and RR 1.07 (1.01-1.15) at >30.5 g/day (lowest risk ~30 g/day)

  • Evidence: Low

A 2024 dose-response meta-analysis of 17 longitudinal studies finds a J-shaped curve: light drinking (about one standard drink a day or less) is associated with slightly lower dementia risk than abstention, while heavier intake raises risk by about a quarter. The apparent protective effect of light drinking is contested because abstainer groups often include former heavy drinkers and people who stopped for health reasons (sick-quitter bias); this record should be read with the 'excessive-alcohol' record.

PMID 39038743. Search to April 2023; restricted cubic spline dose-response; 80,680 persons with 4,929 dementia cases and 13,530 persons with 1,579 cognitive-dysfunction cases. J-shape persisted in subgroups by age (<=65, >65) and study duration for dementia. Evidence strength 'low' reflects observational design and abstainer-bias concerns raised in the summary (the abstract itself does not discuss sick-quitter bias).

Source: Zarezadeh M, Mahmoudinezhad M, Faghfouri AH, et al. Alcohol consumption in relation to cognitive dysfunction and dementia: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of comparative longitudinal studies. Ageing Res Rev 2024;100:102419 · 2024

Influenza vaccination (observational cohorts)

Basis not stated No significant effect

Overall population: HR 0.93 (95% CI 0.86-1.01), not significant; high-risk populations (CKD, COPD, vascular disease): 2-3 doses HR 0.84 (0.76-0.92), >=4 doses HR 0.43 (0.38-0.48)

  • Evidence: Low

Across eight cohort studies with nearly 10 million people, influenza vaccination was not significantly associated with lower dementia incidence in the general population, although a dose-response association appeared in people with chronic kidney disease, COPD or vascular disease. Repeated vaccination is strongly confounded by health-seeking behaviour, so the subgroup finding should not be read as causal; contrast with the quasi-experimental zoster-vaccine record.

PMID 40601364. Search to 6 April 2025; 8 cohort studies, 9,938,696 subjects; Newcastle-Ottawa risk of bias low in all but one study; random-effects model. Direction recorded as no-significant-effect for the overall population (the primary comparison); the authors' own conclusion emphasises the dose-response finding.

Source: Yang WK, Shao SC, Liu CC, Chi CC. Influenza vaccination and risk of dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Age Ageing 2025;54(7):afaf169 · 2025

What to do with all this

The changes with the best evidence behind them — treating hearing loss, controlling blood pressure, not smoking, staying physically active and socially connected — are good for your heart and your mood regardless of what they do to dementia risk specifically. That is a reasonable basis for acting on them.

None of this changes what a risk gene means. If you are considering genetic testing, ask for a genetic counsellor before you test, not after, and talk to your own doctor before changing any medicine or supplement.

See it on a timeline The life-course timeline → The same factors, placed at the age they act and next to the trials studied at that age. More on genetics Genetics → Ancestry differences, polygenic risk scores, and what researchers themselves flag as uncertain. The trial evidence Prevention → Which lifestyle trials actually tested these factors, and what they found. Medicines Treatments → Approved drugs, drugs in trials, and drugs that failed — with real indications, not marketing claims.

Where these numbers come from

Records behind this page
31
Distinct sources
23
Years covered
1997–2025
Basis
0 measured · 15 modelled · 16 not stated
Data collected
2026-09-21
Source files
risk_factors.json (41 KB, 31 rows), genetics.json (167 KB, 135 rows)

Most-cited sources on this page

What could make these numbers misleading

Almost everything on this page is association, not proven causation: nearly all of the underlying numbers come from observational cohorts, not randomised trials, so a factor being on this page does not mean changing it changes your risk. A relative risk, odds ratio or hazard ratio compares one group of people to another; it does not predict what will happen to one person.

Every figure on this page is read straight out of a file in our data folder; nothing is typed in by hand. You can download the raw data and check any row yourself. This is a summary of published research, not medical advice.

From the research library

The highest-scoring studies we hold on this subject, each summarised in plain English. Scores are alzhub's usefulness score, not a verdict on the science.

Risk factors

All 2,174 studies on Risk factors →