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.

54/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. How common it is

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

The moderate to high isolation group demonstrated a significantly elevated risk of dementia compared with the low isolation group. In the discovery cohort, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) was 1.22 (95% CI 1.01-1.47, P=.04), while the validation cohort showed an HR of 1.62 (95% CI 1.27-2.08, P<.001). The pooled analysis across both cohorts revealed an adjusted HR of 1.36 (95% CI 1.16-1.59, P<.001). Kaplan-Meier curves corroborated a higher incidence of dementia in the moderate to high isolation group. Our findings indicate that digital isolation is a significant risk factor for dementia among older adults. This study underscores the importance of digital engagement in mitigating dementia risk and suggests that promoting digital literacy and access to digital resources should be integral components of public health strategies aimed at dementia prevention.

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

APA 7th

Deng, C., Shen, N., Li, G., Zhang, K., & Yang, S. (2025). Digital Isolation and Dementia Risk in Older Adults: Longitudinal Cohort Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research. https://doi.org/10.2196/65379

Vancouver

Deng C, Shen N, Li G, Zhang K, Yang S. Digital Isolation and Dementia Risk in Older Adults: Longitudinal Cohort Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2025. doi:10.2196/65379. PMID: 39969956.

BibTeX

@article{deng2025-39969956,
  author  = {Deng, Cheng and Shen, Na and Li, Guangzhou and Zhang, Ke and Yang, Shijun},
  title   = {{Digital Isolation and Dementia Risk in Older Adults: Longitudinal Cohort Study}},
  journal = {Journal of Medical Internet Research},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.2196/65379},
  pmid    = {39969956},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.2196/65379}
}

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

The moderate to high isolation group demonstrated a significantly elevated risk of dementia compared with the low isolation group.
In the discovery cohort, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) was 1.22 (95% CI 1.01-1.47, P=.04), while the validation cohort showed an HR of 1.62 (95% CI 1.27-2.08, P<.001).
The pooled analysis across both cohorts revealed an adjusted HR of 1.36 (95% CI 1.16-1.59, P<.001).
Kaplan-Meier curves corroborated a higher incidence of dementia in the moderate to high isolation group.
Our findings indicate that digital isolation is a significant risk factor for dementia among older adults.

Why it matters

This longitudinal cohort study found that older adults with moderate to high digital isolation had a significantly elevated risk of dementia compared with those with low isolation. The authors suggest promoting digital literacy and access as part of public health strategies aimed at dementia prevention.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Alzheimer's in numbers →

Study details

Study designcohort study
Participants8,189
Evidence strengthModerate

How this study scored 54/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Medical Internet Research)
Journal's citation record	3 / 4	Journal of Medical Internet Research: journal h-index 286 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	7 / 12	A cohort study following 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	4 / 5	2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	3 / 4	8,189 participants
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	3 / 3	Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded	0 / 2	No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	2 / 7	Cited 7 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	1 / 5	2.3 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025
Impact for its field and year	3 / 6	Cited 4.4× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	0 / 6	No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited	1 / 4	Cited 7 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	1 / 4	Last-listed author Shijun Yang: h-index 16 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	University of Utah: institution h-index 1,238 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration	1 / 3	OpenAlex lists 3 institution(s) in 2 countries
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 39969956)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Total	54 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Related studies in How common it is

Also tagged “incidence”

1,084 studies in the library carry the topic tag “incidence”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,084 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on How common it is

See all studies in How common it is →