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 56 out of 100. Digital health tools

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background Up to half of patients with dementia may not receive a formal diagnosis, limiting access to appropriate services. It is hypothesised that it may be possible to identify undiagnosed dementia from a profile of symptoms recorded in routine clinical practice. Aim The aim of this study is to develop a machine learning-based model that could be used in general practice to detect dementia from routinely collected NHS data. The model would be a useful tool for identifying people who may be living with dementia but have not been formally diagnosed. Design & setting The study involved a case-control design and analysis of primary care data routinely collected over a 2-year period. Dementia diagnosed during the study period was compared to no diagnosis of dementia during the same period using pseudonymised routinely collected primary care clinical data. Method Routinely collected Read-encoded data were obtained from 18 consenting GP surgeries across Devon, for 26 483 patients aged >65 years. The authors determined Read codes assigned to patients that may contribute to dementia risk. These codes were used as features to train a machine-learning classification model to identify patients that may have underlying dementia. Results The model obtained sensitivity and specificity values of 84.47% and 86.67%, respectively. Conclusion The results show that routinely collected primary care data may be used to identify undiagnosed dementia. The methodology is promising and, if successfully developed and deployed, may help to increase dementia diagnosis in primary care.

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

APA 7th

Jammeh, E. A., Carroll, C. B., Pearson, S. W., Escudero, J., Anastasiou, A., Zhao, P., et al. (2018). Machine-learning based identification of undiagnosed dementia in primary care: a feasibility study. BJGP open. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen18x101589

Vancouver

Jammeh EA, Carroll CB, Pearson SW, Escudero J, Anastasiou A, Zhao P, et al. Machine-learning based identification of undiagnosed dementia in primary care: a feasibility study. BJGP open. 2018. doi:10.3399/bjgpopen18x101589. PMID: 30564722.

BibTeX

@article{jammeh2018-30564722,
  author  = {Jammeh, E. A. and Carroll, C. B. and Pearson, S. W. and Escudero, J. and Anastasiou, A. and Zhao, P. and Chenore, T. and Zajicek, J. and others},
  title   = {{Machine-learning based identification of undiagnosed dementia in primary care: a feasibility study}},
  journal = {BJGP open},
  year    = {2018},
  doi     = {10.3399/bjgpopen18x101589},
  pmid    = {30564722},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen18x101589}
}

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

Why it matters

This case-control feasibility study used routinely collected primary care data from 26,483 patients aged over 65 to train a machine learning model to identify undiagnosed dementia, achieving sensitivity and specificity values of 84.47% and 86.67%. The results show that routinely collected primary care data may be used to identify undiagnosed dementia.

Study details

How this study scored 56/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 0 of 4; Study design 6 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 4 of 7; Citations per year 2 of 5; Impact for its field and year 3 of 6; Cited by studies here 2 of 6; Still being cited 1 of 4; Senior author's track record 2 of 4; Institution's track record 1 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 2 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. Total 56 of 100.56 of 100 points earned44 not earned

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a case-control study. Scored zero for randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (BJGP open)
Journal's citation record 0 / 4 BJGP Open: journal h-index 39 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 6 / 12 A case-control study
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 2 / 5 2018 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 483 participants
Effect reported 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
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 4 / 7 Cited 58 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 2 / 5 5.8 citations a year over 10 year(s) since 2018
Impact for its field and year 3 / 6 Cited 4.2× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 2 / 6 Cited by 3 other studies in this library
Still being cited 1 / 4 Cited 12 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 2 / 4 Last-listed author Emmanuel Ifeachor: h-index 35 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 1 / 3 University of Edinburgh: institution h-index 1,378 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 2 / 3 OpenAlex lists 4 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 30564722)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Total 56 / 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 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

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

Related studies in Digital health tools

Also tagged “prevalence”

1,224 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 1,224 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Digital health tools

See all studies in Digital health tools →