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.

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 43 out of 100. Disparities

Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology

Background The burden of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRDs) is expected to grow rapidly with population aging, especially in low- and middle-income countries, in the next few decades. We used a willingness-to-pay approach to project the global, regional, and national economic burden of ADRDs from 2019 to 2050 under status quo. Methods We projected age group and country-specific disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) lost to ADRDs in future years based on historical growth in disease burden and available population projections. We used country-specific extrapolations of the value of a statistical life (VSL) year and its future projections based on historical income growth to estimate the economic burden - measured in terms of the value of lost DALYs - of ADRDs. A probabilistic uncertainty analysis was used to calculate point estimates and 95% uncertainty bounds of the economic burden. Findings In 2019, the global VSL-based economic burden of ADRDs was an estimated $2.8 trillion. The burden was projected to increase to $4.7 trillion (95% uncertainty bound: $4 trillion-$5.5 trillion) in 2030, $8.5 trillion ($6.8 trillion-$10.8 trillion) in 2040, and $16.9 trillion ($11.3 trillion-$27.3 trillion) in 2050. Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) would account for 65% of the global VSL-based economic burden in 2050, as compared with only 18% in 2019. Within LMICs, upper-middle income countries would carry the largest VSL-based economic burden by 2050 (92% of LMICs burden and 60% of global burden). Interpretation ADRDs have a large and inequitable projected future VSL-based economic burden. Funding The Davos Alzheimer's Collaborative.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 43/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 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 2 of 2. 25 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 43 of 100. Total 43 of 100.25 of the 58 points we could judge = 43 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, 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 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (EClinicalMedicine)
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 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 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)
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 35898316)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 25 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100.
Total 43 / 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.

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. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Nandi, A., Counts, N., Chen, S., Seligman, B., Tortorice, D., Vigo, D., et al. (2022). Global and regional projections of the economic burden of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias from 2019 to 2050: A value of statistical life approach. EClinicalMedicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101580

Vancouver

Nandi A, Counts N, Chen S, Seligman B, Tortorice D, Vigo D, et al. Global and regional projections of the economic burden of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias from 2019 to 2050: A value of statistical life approach. EClinicalMedicine. 2022. doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101580. PMID: 35898316.

BibTeX

@article{nandi2022-35898316,
  author  = {Nandi, A. and Counts, N. and Chen, S. and Seligman, B. and Tortorice, D. and Vigo, D. and Bloom, D. E.},
  title   = {{Global and regional projections of the economic burden of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias from 2019 to 2050: A value of statistical life approach}},
  journal = {EClinicalMedicine},
  year    = {2022},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101580},
  pmid    = {35898316},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101580}
}

Related studies in Disparities

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.

Similar studies

More on Disparities

See all studies in Disparities →