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.

48/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Health systems and care delivery

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Of the 508 eligible MA enrollees, mean age was 82.8 (SD = 7.2) years, 81% were female, and 49% were non-Latino White; 62 participants (12%) were classified as having dementia by the cohort assessment. MA-encounter-based dementia indicators performed reasonably well in identifying participants with cohort-assessed dementia: using encounters alone, positive predictive value was 63% (95% CI: 52%-75%), negative predictive value was 96% (95% CI: 94%-98%), and accuracy was 92% (95% CI: 89%-94%). Inclusion of chart reviews did not impact performance. Compared to TM-based indicators during the same period, MA-based indicators yielded similar validity metrics but identified a less functionally impaired group as having dementia. In secondary validation analysis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), sensitivity was low. As one of the first studies to validate dementia diagnoses in MA encounter data, indicators based on the Bynum-Standard algorithm can be a valid tool for identifying prevalent dementia. Findings support the use of MA-encounter-based dementia indicators for research within MA. However, observed health differences between MA- and TM-identified dementia groups suggest potential for selection bias in MA plans.

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

APA 7th

Chen, Y., Benloucif, S., James, B. D., Banerjee, M., grodstein, f., & Bynum, J. (2026). Identification of prevalent dementia in Medicare Advantage encounters, compared with rigorous cohort assessments. The Journals of Gerontology Series A. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glag206

Vancouver

Chen Y, Benloucif S, James BD, Banerjee M, grodstein f, Bynum J. Identification of prevalent dementia in Medicare Advantage encounters, compared with rigorous cohort assessments. The Journals of Gerontology Series A. 2026. doi:10.1093/gerona/glag206. PMID: 42635557.

BibTeX

@article{chen2026-42635557,
  author  = {Chen, Yi and Benloucif, Slim and James, Bryan David and Banerjee, Mousumi and grodstein, francine and Bynum, Julie},
  title   = {{Identification of prevalent dementia in Medicare Advantage encounters, compared with rigorous cohort assessments}},
  journal = {The Journals of Gerontology Series A},
  year    = {2026},
  doi     = {10.1093/gerona/glag206},
  pmid    = {42635557},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glag206}
}

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

Of the 508 eligible MA enrollees, mean age was 82.8 (SD = 7.2) years, 81% were female, and 49% were non-Latino White; 62 participants (12%) were classified as having dementia by the cohort assessment.
MA-encounter-based dementia indicators performed reasonably well in identifying participants with cohort-assessed dementia: using encounters alone, positive predictive value was 63% (95% CI: 52%-75%), negative predictive value was 96% (95% CI: 94%-98%), and accuracy was 92% (95% CI: 89%-94%).
Inclusion of chart reviews did not impact performance.
Compared to TM-based indicators during the same period, MA-based indicators yielded similar validity metrics but identified a less functionally impaired group as having dementia.
In secondary validation analysis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), sensitivity was low.

Why it matters

This study checked how well Medicare Advantage encounter data identified people with dementia compared with detailed cohort assessments, finding the indicators worked reasonably well. It is about identifying dementia in insurance records, not about treating, curing, or preventing Alzheimer's disease.

Study details

Study designcohort study
Participants62
Evidence strengthModerate

How this study scored 48/100

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

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The Journals of Gerontology Series A)
Journal's citation record	3 / 4	The Journals of Gerontology Series A: journal h-index 274 (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	5 / 5	2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	1 / 4	62 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)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	0 / 7	Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	0 / 5	0.0 citations a year over 2 year(s) since 2026
Impact for its field and year	0 / 6	Cited 0.0× 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	0 / 4	Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	2 / 4	Last-listed author Julie Bynum: h-index 45 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	2 / 3	University of Michigan: institution h-index 2,240 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	1 / 3	OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 42635557)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Total	48 / 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.

Related studies in Health systems and care delivery

Also tagged “prevalence”

1,223 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 1,223 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Health systems and care delivery

See all studies in Health systems and care delivery →