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 66 out of 100. Digital health tools

Topic: Air pollution and environmental exposures

Neurodegenerative disease in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was observed. We aim to clarify the risk of dementia in patients with COPD. The study used claims data from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database. Subjects were those who received a discharge diagnosis of COPD between January 1, 2002 and December 31, 2011. Only the first hospitalization was enrolled, and the index date was the first day of admission. Patients younger than 40 years or those with a history of Alzheimer disease (AD) or Parkinson disease (PD) before the index date were excluded. The patients with COPD were then followed until receiving a diagnosis of AD or PD, death, or the end of the study. Control subjects were selected from hospitalized patients without a history of COPD, AD, or PD and were matched according to age (±3 years), gender, and the year of admission at a 2:1 ratio. The comorbidities were measured from 1 year before the index date based on the ICD-9-CM codes. The study included 8640 patients with COPD and a mean age of 68.76 (±10.74) years. The adjusted hazard ratio of developing dementia (AD or PD) was 1.74 (95% confidence interval = 1.55-1.96) in patients with COPD compared with patients without COPD after adjusting for age, gender, and comorbidities. This nationwide cohort study demonstrates that the risk of dementia, including AD and PD, is significantly increased in patients with COPD compared with individuals in the general population.

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

APA 7th

Liao, K. M., Ho, C. H., Ko, S. C., & Li, C. Y. (2015). Increased Risk of Dementia in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000000930

Vancouver

Liao KM, Ho CH, Ko SC, Li CY. Increased Risk of Dementia in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Medicine. 2015. doi:10.1097/md.0000000000000930. PMID: 26061317.

BibTeX

@article{liao2015-26061317,
  author  = {Liao, K. M. and Ho, C. H. and Ko, S. C. and Li, C. Y.},
  title   = {{Increased Risk of Dementia in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease}},
  journal = {Medicine},
  year    = {2015},
  doi     = {10.1097/md.0000000000000930},
  pmid    = {26061317},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000000930}
}

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

Study details

How this study scored 66/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 7 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 3 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 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. 38 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 66 of 100. Total 66 of 100.38 of the 58 points we could judge = 66 of 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. 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 38 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 66 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Medicine)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
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 1 / 5 2015 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 3 / 4 8,640 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 — / 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 26061317)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 38 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 38 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 66 out of 100.
Total 66 / 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.

Related studies in Digital health tools

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.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Digital health tools

See all studies in Digital health tools →