Home › Research › Disparities
Alzheimer's disease in African Americans: risk factors and challenges for the future
Barnes LL, Bennett DA.. Health affairs (Project Hope), 2014-04-01
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Plain-language summary
As the US elderly population continues to expand rapidly, Alzheimer's disease poses a major and increasing public health challenge, and older African Americans may be disproportionately burdened by the disease. Although African Americans were generally underincluded in previous research studies, new and growing evidence suggests that they may be at increased risk of the disease and that they differ from the non-Hispanic white population in risk factors and disease manifestation. This article offers an overview of the challenges of Alzheimer's disease in African Americans, including diagnosis issues, disparities in risk factors and clinical presentation of disease, and community-based recommendations to enhance research with this population.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Barnes, L. L., & Bennett, D. A. (2014). Alzheimer's disease in African Americans: risk factors and challenges for the future. Health affairs (Project Hope). https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2013.1353
Vancouver
Barnes LL, Bennett DA. Alzheimer's disease in African Americans: risk factors and challenges for the future. Health affairs (Project Hope). 2014. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2013.1353. PMID: 24711318.
BibTeX
@article{barnes2014-24711318,
author = {Barnes, L. L. and Bennett, D. A.},
title = {{Alzheimer's disease in African Americans: risk factors and challenges for the future}},
journal = {Health affairs (Project Hope)},
year = {2014},
doi = {10.1377/hlthaff.2013.1353},
pmid = {24711318},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2013.1353}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Although African Americans were generally underincluded in previous research studies, new and growing evidence suggests that they may be at increased risk of the disease and that they differ from the non-Hispanic white population in risk factors and disease manifestation.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Disparities →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Health affairs (Project Hope)) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2014 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 24711318) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Disparities from nearby years
Also tagged “costs”
265 studies in the library carry the topic tag “costs”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 265 tagged studies.