alzhub.org
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.

Home › Research › Caregiving

Dementia in Africa: Current evidence, knowledge gaps, and future directions

Akinyemi RO, Yaria J, Ojagbemi A, Guerchet M, Okubadejo N, Njamnshi AK, Sarfo FS, Akpalu A et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2021-09-27

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. Caregiving

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

In tandem with the ever-increasing aging population in low and middle-income countries, the burden of dementia is rising on the African continent. Dementia prevalence varies from 2.3% to 20.0% and incidence rates are 13.3 per 1000 person-years with increasing mortality in parts of rapidly transforming Africa. Differences in nutrition, cardiovascular factors, comorbidities, infections, mortality, and detection likely contribute to lower incidence. Alzheimer's disease, vascular dementia, and human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome-associated neurocognitive disorders are the most common dementia subtypes. Comprehensive longitudinal studies with robust methodology and regional coverage would provide more reliable information. The apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 allele is most studied but has shown differential effects within African ancestry compared to Caucasian. More candidate gene and genome-wide association studies are needed to relate to dementia phenotypes. Validated culture-sensitive cognitive tools not influenced by education and language differences are critically needed for implementation across multidisciplinary groupings such as the proposed African Dementia Consortium.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Akinyemi, R. O., Yaria, J., Ojagbemi, A., Guerchet, M., Okubadejo, N., Njamnshi, A. K., et al. (2022). Dementia in Africa: Current evidence, knowledge gaps, and future directions. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12432

Vancouver

Akinyemi RO, Yaria J, Ojagbemi A, Guerchet M, Okubadejo N, Njamnshi AK, et al. Dementia in Africa: Current evidence, knowledge gaps, and future directions. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2022. doi:10.1002/alz.12432. PMID: 34569714.

BibTeX

@article{akinyemi2022-34569714,
  author  = {Akinyemi, R. O. and Yaria, J. and Ojagbemi, A. and Guerchet, M. and Okubadejo, N. and Njamnshi, A. K. and Sarfo, F. S. and Akpalu, A. and others},
  title   = {{Dementia in Africa: Current evidence, knowledge gaps, and future directions}},
  journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
  year    = {2022},
  doi     = {10.1002/alz.12432},
  pmid    = {34569714},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12432}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Caregiving →

Study details

How this study scored 62/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 7 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 36 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 62 of 100. Total 62 of 100.36 of the 58 points we could judge = 62 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for sample size, studied in people and randomised / 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 multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 36 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 62 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 7 / 12 A longitudinal study following the same people over time
Strength of evidence 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 3 / 5 2022 — within 6 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 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation 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
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 34569714)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 36 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 36 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 62 out of 100.
Total 62 / 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 Caregiving

Also tagged “prevalence”

1,224 studies in the library carry the topic tag “prevalence”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,224 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Caregiving

See all studies in Caregiving →