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 47 out of 100. Costs and economics

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

This global study estimated how much dementia costs the world, combining formal healthcare spending with the value of unpaid family caregiving across 204 countries. In 2019, direct healthcare spending on dementia was about $261 billion, but unpaid informal caregiving added even more, about $354 billion, making up more than half of the total cost. By 2050, direct dementia healthcare spending alone is projected to reach $1.6 trillion, nearly one-tenth of all projected global health spending.

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

APA 7th

Lastuka, A., et al. (2024). Societal Costs of Dementia: 204 Countries, 2000-2019. Journal of Alzheimer's Disease.

Vancouver

Lastuka A, et al. Societal Costs of Dementia: 204 Countries, 2000-2019. Journal of Alzheimer's Disease. 2024.

BibTeX

@article{lastuka2024-cc17c386,
  author  = {Lastuka, A. and others},
  title   = {{Societal Costs of Dementia: 204 Countries, 2000-2019}},
  journal = {Journal of Alzheimer's Disease},
  year    = {2024}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. This record has no DOI, so the citation leaves it out. 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 global study estimated that in 2019, direct healthcare spending on dementia was about $261 billion, but unpaid informal caregiving added even more, about $354 billion, making up more than half of the total cost. By 2050, direct dementia healthcare spending alone is projected to reach $1.6 trillion, nearly one-tenth of all projected global health spending.

Study details

Limitations

Most countries lack direct cost-of-illness data, so estimates for many countries rely on statistical imputation (spatiotemporal Gaussian process regression) rather than direct measurement, and wide uncertainty intervals reflect this data sparsity.

How this study scored 47/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 3 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 4 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 0 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 0 of 6; 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 0 of 2; Free to read left out, no data. 29 of the 62 points it could be judged on, which is 47 of 100. Total 47 of 100.29 of the 62 points we could judge = 47 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a computer model rather than new measurements. Scored zero for sample size, studied in people, randomised / blinded and indexed in PubMed 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, 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 29 of the 62 points we could judge it on, which is 47 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Alzheimer's Disease)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 3 / 12 A computer model rather than new measurements
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 4 / 5 2024 — 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 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
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 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
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 0 / 2 No PubMed ID and no DOI — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 29 / 62 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 29 of the 62 points we could judge it on is 47 out of 100.
Total 47 / 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.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in Costs and economics

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 Costs and economics

See all studies in Costs and economics →