Home › Research › Disparities
Pathways to Racial/Ethnic Inequalities in Dementia
Jordan D Palms, Ketlyne Sol, Laura B Zahodne. Annual review of clinical psychology, 2025-01-13
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
Individuals from minoritized racial/ethnic groups face a disproportionate burden of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. This health inequality reflects structural racism, which creates and sustains racial differences in social determinants of health, including education access and quality, economic stability, social and community context, neighborhood and built environment, and health care access and quality. Thus, understanding pathways that lead to dementia inequalities requires addressing individual- and system-level factors. This article summarizes evidence linking each social determinant of health to racial/ethnic inequalities in dementia, emphasizing upstream factors and mechanisms as potential levels of intervention. The importance of resilience in marginalized groups as well as critical research considerations for dementia inequalities are also discussed. Future directions highlight the need to understand the common and unique mechanisms driving inequalities across minoritized groups, where research is lacking.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Palms, J. D., Sol, K., & Zahodne, L. B. (2025). Pathways to Racial/Ethnic Inequalities in Dementia. Annual review of clinical psychology. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-081423-032631
Vancouver
Palms JD, Sol K, Zahodne LB. Pathways to Racial/Ethnic Inequalities in Dementia. Annual review of clinical psychology. 2025. doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-081423-032631. PMID: 39805030.
BibTeX
@article{palms2025-39805030,
author = {Palms, Jordan D and Sol, Ketlyne and Zahodne, Laura B},
title = {{Pathways to Racial/Ethnic Inequalities in Dementia}},
journal = {Annual review of clinical psychology},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-081423-032631},
pmid = {39805030},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-081423-032631}
}
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
- This health inequality reflects structural racism, which creates and sustains racial differences in social determinants of health, including education access and quality, economic stability, social and community context, neighborhood and built environment, and health care access and quality.
- Thus, understanding pathways that lead to dementia inequalities requires addressing individual- and system-level factors.
- This article summarizes evidence linking each social determinant of health to racial/ethnic inequalities in dementia, emphasizing upstream factors and mechanisms as potential levels of intervention.
- The importance of resilience in marginalized groups as well as critical research considerations for dementia inequalities are also discussed.
- Future directions highlight the need to understand the common and unique mechanisms driving inequalities across minoritized groups, where research is lacking.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Disparities →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 43/100
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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 24 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Annual review of clinical psychology) |
| 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 | 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) |
| 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 39805030) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 24 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 24 of the 56 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.
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.