Home › Research › How common it is
Generational Differences in Age-Specific Dementia Prevalence Rates
Dou X, Lenzen S, Connelly LB, Lin R. JAMA Network Open, 2025-06-02
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Importance Dementia is a significant public health challenge, with its prevalence expected to increase as life expectancy continues to extend globally. Results Of the 99 420 individuals (mean [SD] age, 79.1 [6.2] years; 59.2% women) in the HRS dataset, 21 069 (21.2%) were included in this study; of the 83 580 individuals (mean [SD] age, 78.6 [5.9] years; 54.7% women) in the SHARE dataset, 32 490 (38.9%) were included in this study; and of the 31 384 individuals (mean [SD] age, 77.9 [5.6] years; 55.8% women) in the ELSA dataset, 8878 (28.3%) were included in this study. This decreasing trend was more pronounced among women than men (point estimate in 1944-1948 for women vs men: US, -0.55 [95% CI, -0.86 to -0.30] vs -0.48 [95% CI, -0.84 to -0.13]; Europe, -1.50 [95% CI, -1.80 to -1.21] vs -1.34 [95% CI, -1.70 to -0.99]; and England, -0.76 [95% CI, -1.30 to -0.23] vs -0.07 [95% CI, -0.69 to 0.54]); the point estimates for men in England were not statistically significant. Conclusions and relevance In this cross-sectional study examining generational differences in age-specific dementia prevalence across the US, Europe, and England, we found that individuals from more recent birth cohorts had lower proportions of people with dementia.
Key findings
- Importance Dementia is a significant public health challenge, with its prevalence expected to increase as life expectancy continues to extend globally.
- Results Of the 99 420 individuals (mean [SD] age, 79.1 [6.2] years; 59.2% women) in the HRS dataset, 21 069 (21.2%) were included in this study; of the 83 580 individuals (mean [SD] age, 78.6 [5.9] years; 54.7% women) in the SHARE dataset, 32 490 (38.9%) were included in this study; and of the 31 384 individuals (mean [SD] age, 77.9 [5.6] years; 55.8% women) in the ELSA dataset, 8878 (28.3%) were included in this study.
- This decreasing trend was more pronounced among women than men (point estimate in 1944-1948 for women vs men: US, -0.55 [95% CI, -0.86 to -0.30] vs -0.48 [95% CI, -0.84 to -0.13]; Europe, -1.50 [95% CI, -1.80 to -1.21] vs -1.34 [95% CI, -1.70 to -0.99]; and England, -0.76 [95% CI, -1.30 to -0.23] vs -0.07 [95% CI, -0.69 to 0.54]); the point estimates for men in England were not statistically significant.
- Conclusions and relevance In this cross-sectional study examining generational differences in age-specific dementia prevalence across the US, Europe, and England, we found that individuals from more recent birth cohorts had lower proportions of people with dementia.
Why it matters
Looking at data from the US, Europe, and England, this study found that people born in more recent years had lower proportions of dementia at a given age. The downward trend was more pronounced among women than men, and for men in England the estimates were not statistically significant.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Alzheimer's in numbers →
Study details
- Study designcross-sectional
- Participants62,437
- Evidence strengthModerate
Limitations
Cross-sectional survey data with algorithm-defined dementia rather than clinical diagnosis; age-period-cohort models rely on modelling assumptions; survey attrition may bias estimates.
How this study scored 55/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 52 of the 94 points we could judge it on, which is 55 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (JAMA Network Open) |
| Journal's citation record | 2 / 4 | JAMA Network Open: journal h-index 235 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 4 / 12 | A snapshot of people at one point in 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 | 4 / 4 | 62,437 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 8 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 1 / 5 | 2.7 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025 |
| Impact for its field and year | 3 / 6 | Cited 5.1× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 1 / 6 | Cited by 1 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 1 / 4 | Cited 8 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | 2 / 3 | The University of Queensland: institution h-index 1,516 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 1 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 3 institution(s) in 3 countries |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40455442) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 52 / 94 | Scored on 18 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 52 of the 94 points we could judge it on is 55 out of 100. |
| Total | 55 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
- DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.13384
- PubMed: 40455442
- Original source →
- Free full text: PubMed Central →
Full text: free to read — PubMed Central lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 10 Oct 2026).
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
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.
APA 7th
Dou, X., Lenzen, S., Connelly, L. B., & Lin, R. (2025). Generational Differences in Age-Specific Dementia Prevalence Rates. JAMA Network Open. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.13384
Vancouver
Dou X, Lenzen S, Connelly LB, Lin R. Generational Differences in Age-Specific Dementia Prevalence Rates. JAMA Network Open. 2025. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.13384. PMID: 40455442.
BibTeX
@article{dou2025-40455442,
author = {Dou, X. and Lenzen, S. and Connelly, L. B. and Lin, R.},
title = {{Generational Differences in Age-Specific Dementia Prevalence Rates}},
journal = {JAMA Network Open},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.13384},
pmid = {40455442},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.13384}
}
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Later studies that cite this one
1 study in the alzhub library lists this one in its references.