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.

50/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Risk factors

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

The characteristics of the cohort revealed significant groupwise differences in age, education, sex, and cognitive diagnosis. Higher rates of cognitive impairment (mild cognitive impairment [MCI] and dementia) were found in NHB and Hispanic compared to NHW partners, despite the latter group being older. There were also higher rates of hypertension and diabetes among NHB and Hispanic compared to NHW partners. Differences were also found across many plasma (A/T[N]) biomarkers and select neuroimaging measures, including meta-region of interest and white matter hyperintensities. Positron emission tomography amyloid positivity rates (but not tau positivity) were found to differ, with higher rates observed among NHW (15% amyloid positivity) compared to NHB (3%) partners. Groups also differed by select SDoH factors, including household income, insurance, having a health-care provider, and Area Deprivation Index. All cognitive measures also revealed groupwise differences. The baseline cohort characteristics for HABS-HD reveal significant group differences spanning demographic, medical, cognitive, and biological factors (including A/T[N] biomarkers), which are all critical to understand as they relate to aging and age-related diseases. Highlights: The Health and Aging Brain Study-Health Disparities (HABS-HD) cohort baseline characteristics and study methodology were provided.Cohort characteristic differences were found across demographic factors, including age, education, sex, and cognitive diagnosis across the representative groups.Biomarkers for amyloid/tau/neurodegeneration spanning blood and neuroimaging were shown to differ as well across cohort groups.Positivity rates for amyloid positron emission tomography were lower for non-Hispanic Black partners in the cohort compared to non-Hispanic White partners.

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

APA 7th

Petersen, M. E., Zhou, Z., Hall, J. R., Phillips, N., Meeker, K. L., Borzage, M., et al. (2025). Health and Aging Brain Study–Health Disparities (HABS‐HD) methods and partner characteristics. Alzheimer s & Dementia Translational Research & Clinical Interventions. https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.70140

Vancouver

Petersen ME, Zhou Z, Hall JR, Phillips N, Meeker KL, Borzage M, et al. Health and Aging Brain Study–Health Disparities (HABS‐HD) methods and partner characteristics. Alzheimer s & Dementia Translational Research & Clinical Interventions. 2025. doi:10.1002/trc2.70140. PMID: 40799724.

BibTeX

@article{petersen2025-40799724,
  author  = {Petersen, Melissa E. and Zhou, Zhengyang and Hall, James Richard and Phillips, Nicole and Meeker, Karin L. and Borzage, Matthew and Braskie, Meredith N. and Clark, Alexandra L. and others},
  title   = {{Health and Aging Brain Study–Health Disparities (HABS‐HD) methods and partner characteristics}},
  journal = {Alzheimer s \& Dementia Translational Research \& Clinical Interventions},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.1002/trc2.70140},
  pmid    = {40799724},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.70140}
}

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

The characteristics of the cohort revealed significant groupwise differences in age, education, sex, and cognitive diagnosis.
Higher rates of cognitive impairment (mild cognitive impairment [MCI] and dementia) were found in NHB and Hispanic compared to NHW partners, despite the latter group being older.
There were also higher rates of hypertension and diabetes among NHB and Hispanic compared to NHW partners.
Differences were also found across many plasma (A/T[N]) biomarkers and select neuroimaging measures, including meta-region of interest and white matter hyperintensities.
Positron emission tomography amyloid positivity rates (but not tau positivity) were found to differ, with higher rates observed among NHW (15% amyloid positivity) compared to NHB (3%) partners.

Why it matters

This cohort study found higher rates of cognitive impairment, hypertension, and diabetes among non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic participants compared to non-Hispanic White participants, despite the White group being older. Amyloid PET positivity was higher among non-Hispanic White participants, and groups also differed in social determinants of health.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →

Study details

Evidence strengthModerate

How this study scored 50/100

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 senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 48 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 50 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Alzheimer s & Dementia Translational Research & Clinical Interventions)
Journal's citation record	1 / 4	Alzheimer s & Dementia Translational Research & Clinical Interventions: journal h-index 84 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	0 / 12	No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
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	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	3 / 7	Cited 37 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	3 / 5	12.3 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025
Impact for its field and year	5 / 6	Cited 23.4× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	2 / 6	Cited by 4 other studies in this library
Still being cited	2 / 4	Cited 37 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	University of California, San Francisco: institution h-index 1,915 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	2 / 3	OpenAlex lists 5 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40799724)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Points	48 / 96	Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 48 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 50 out of 100.
Total	50 / 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. Showing 12 of 13.

Later studies that cite this one

4 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.

Related studies in Risk factors

Also in Risk factors

356 studies in the library are filed under Risk factors with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Risk factors hub.

Similar studies

More on Risk factors

See all studies in Risk factors →