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: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Importance Machine learning algorithms could be used as the basis for clinical decision-making aids to enhance clinical practice. Objective To assess the ability of machine learning algorithms to predict dementia incidence within 2 years compared with existing models and determine the optimal analytic approach and number of variables required. Design, setting, and participants This prognostic study used data from a prospective cohort of 15 307 participants without dementia at baseline to perform a secondary analysis of factors that could be used to predict dementia incidence. Participants attended National Alzheimer Coordinating Center memory clinics across the United States between 2005 and 2015. Analyses were conducted from March to May 2021. Exposures 258 variables spanning domains of dementia-related clinical measures and risk factors. Main outcomes and measures The main outcome was incident all-cause dementia diagnosed within 2 years of baseline assessment. Results In a sample of 15 307 participants (mean [SD] age, 72.3 [9.8] years; 9129 [60%] women and 6178 [40%] men) without dementia at baseline, 1568 (10%) received a diagnosis of dementia within 2 years of their initial assessment. Compared with 2 existing models for dementia risk prediction (ie, Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging, and Incidence of Dementia Risk Score, and the Brief Dementia Screening Indicator), machine learning algorithms were superior in predicting incident all-cause dementia within 2 years. The gradient-boosted trees algorithm had a mean (SD) overall accuracy of 92% (1%), sensitivity of 0.45 (0.05), specificity of 0.97 (0.01), and area under the curve of 0.92 (0.01) using all 258 variables. Analysis of variable importance showed that only 6 variables were required for machine learning algorithms to achieve an accuracy of 91% and area under the curve of at least 0.89. Machine learning algorithms also identified up to 84% of participants who received an initial dementia diagnosis that was subsequently reversed to mild cognitive impairment or cognitively unimpaired, suggesting possible misdiagnosis. Conclusions and relevance These findings suggest that machine learning algorithms could accurately predict incident dementia within 2 years in patients receiving care at memory clinics using only 6 variables. These findings could be used to inform the development and validation of decision-making aids in memory clinics.

Key findings

Why it matters

In 15,307 participants without dementia at baseline, machine learning algorithms were assessed for predicting dementia incidence within 2 years and compared with two existing risk prediction models. The study concerns prediction and clinical decision-making aids, not treating, curing, or preventing Alzheimer's disease.

Study details

How this study scored 66/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record 2 of 4; Study design 7 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 5 of 7; Citations per year 3 of 5; Impact for its field and year 4 of 6; Cited by studies here 3 of 6; Still being cited 3 of 4; Senior author's track record 3 of 4; Institution's track record 1 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 1 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. Total 66 of 100.66 of 100 points earned34 not earned

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a prospective cohort study, followed forward from enrollment. Scored zero for effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (JAMA network open)
Journal's citation record 2 / 4 JAMA Network Open: journal h-index 235 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 7 / 12 A prospective cohort study, followed forward from enrollment
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 3 / 5 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 307 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 5 / 7 Cited 119 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 3 / 5 17.0 citations a year over 7 year(s) since 2021
Impact for its field and year 4 / 6 Cited 12.1× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 3 / 6 Cited by 10 other studies in this library
Still being cited 3 / 4 Cited 71 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 3 / 4 Last-listed author David J. Llewellyn: h-index 68 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 1 / 3 University of Exeter: institution h-index 905 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 1 / 3 OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 34913981)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Total 66 / 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).

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

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.

APA 7th

James, C., Ranson, J. M., Everson, R., & Llewellyn, D. J. (2021). Performance of Machine Learning Algorithms for Predicting Progression to Dementia in Memory Clinic Patients. JAMA network open. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.36553

Vancouver

James C, Ranson JM, Everson R, Llewellyn DJ. Performance of Machine Learning Algorithms for Predicting Progression to Dementia in Memory Clinic Patients. JAMA network open. 2021. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.36553. PMID: 34913981.

BibTeX

@article{james2021-34913981,
  author  = {James, C. and Ranson, J. M. and Everson, R. and Llewellyn, D. J.},
  title   = {{Performance of Machine Learning Algorithms for Predicting Progression to Dementia in Memory Clinic Patients}},
  journal = {JAMA network open},
  year    = {2021},
  doi     = {10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.36553},
  pmid    = {34913981},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.36553}
}

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

10 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.

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 →