Harmonisation of later-life cognitive function across national contexts: results from the Harmonized Cognitive Assessment Protocols.

BACKGROUND: The Harmonized Cognitive Assessment Protocol (HCAP) is an innovative instrument for cross-national comparisons of later-life cognitive function, yet its suitability across diverse populations is unknown. We aimed to harmonise general and domain-specific cognitive scores from HCAP studies across six countries, and evaluate reliability and criterion validity of the resulting harmonised scores. METHODS: We statistically harmonised general and domain-specific cognitive function scores across publicly available HCAP partner studies in China, England, India, Mexico, South Africa, and the USA conducted between October, 2015 and January, 2020. Participants missing all cognitive test items in a given HCAP were excluded. We used an item banking approach that leveraged common cognitive test items across studies and tests that were unique to studies. We generated harmonised factor scores to represent a person's relative functioning on the latent factors of general cognitive function, memory, executive function, orientation, and language using confirmatory factor analysis. We evaluated the marginal reliability, or precision, of the factor scores using test information plots. Criterion validity of factor scores was assessed by regressing the scores on age, gender, and educational attainment in a multivariable analysis adjusted for these characteristics. FINDINGS: We included 21 144 participants from the six HCAP studies of interest (11 480 women [54·3%] and 9664 [45·7%] men), with a median age of 69 years (IQR 64-76). Confirmatory factor analysis models of cognitive function in each country fit well: 31 (88·6%) of 35 models had adequate or good fit to the data (comparative fit index ≥0·90, root mean square error of approximation ≤0·08, and standardised root mean residual ≤0·08). Marginal reliability of the harmonised general cognitive function factor was high (>0·9) for 19 044 (90·1%) of 21 144 participant scores across the six countries. Marginal reliability of the harmonised factor was above 0·85 for 19 281 (91·2%) of 21 142 participant factor scores for memory, 7805 (41·0%) of 19 015 scores for executive function, 3446 (16·3%) of 21 103 scores for orientation, and 4329 (20·5%) of 21 113 scores for language. In each country, general cognitive function scores were lower with older age and higher with greater levels of educational attainment. INTERPRETATION: We statistically harmonised cognitive function measures across six large population-based studies of cognitive ageing. These harmonised cognitive function scores empirically reflect comparable domains of cognitive function among older adults across the six countries, have high reliability, and are useful for population-based research. This work provides a foundation for international networks of researchers to make improved inferences and direct comparisons of cross-national associations of risk factors for cognitive outcomes in pooled analyses. FUNDING: US National Institute on Aging.

Harmonization of Later-Life Cognitive Function Across National Contexts: Results from the Harmonized Cognitive Assessment Protocols (HCAPs).

Background: The Harmonized Cognitive Assessment Protocol (HCAP) is an innovative instrument for cross-national comparisons of later-life cognitive function, yet its suitability across diverse populations is unknown. We aimed to harmonize general and domain-specific cognitive scores from HCAPs across six countries, and evaluate precision and criterion validity of the resulting harmonized scores. Methods: We statistically harmonized general and domain-specific cognitive function across the six publicly available HCAP partner studies in the United States, England, India, Mexico, China, and South Africa (N=21,141). We used an item banking approach that leveraged common cognitive test items across studies and tests that were unique to studies, as identified by a multidisciplinary expert panel. We generated harmonized factor scores for general and domain- specific cognitive function using serially estimated graded-response item response theory (IRT) models. We evaluated precision of the factor scores using test information plots and criterion validity using age, gender, and educational attainment. Findings: IRT models of cognitive function in each country fit well. We compared measurement reliability of the harmonized general cognitive function factor across each cohort using test information plots; marginal reliability was high (r> 0·90) for 93% of respondents across six countries. In each country, general cognitive function scores were lower with older ages and higher with greater levels of educational attainment. Interpretation: We statistically harmonized cognitive function measures across six large, population-based studies of cognitive aging in the US, England, India, Mexico, China, and South Africa. Precision of the estimated scores was excellent. This work provides a foundation for international networks of researchers to make stronger inferences and direct comparisons of cross-national associations of risk factors for cognitive outcomes. Funding: National Institute on Aging (R01 AG070953, R01 AG030153, R01 AG051125, U01 AG058499; U24 AG065182; R01AG051158).

Measurement differences in the assessment of functional limitations for cognitive impairment classification across geographic locations.

INTRODUCTION: The measurement of dementia in cross-national contexts relies on the assessment of functional limitations. We aimed to evaluate the performance of survey items on functional limitations across culturally diverse geographic settings. METHODS: We used data from the Harmonized Cognitive Assessment Protocol Surveys (HCAP) in five countries (total N = 11,250) to quantify associations between items on functional limitations and cognitive impairment. RESULTS: Many items performed better in the United States and England compared to South Africa, India, and Mexico. Items on the Community Screening Instrument for Dementia (CSID) had the least variability across countries (SD = 0.73 vs. 0.92 [Blessed] and 0.98 [Jorm IQCODE]), but also the weakest associations with cognitive impairment (median odds ratio [OR] = 2.23 vs. 3.01 [Blessed] and 2.75 [Jorm IQCODE]). DISCUSSION: Differences in cultural norms for reporting functional limitations likely influences performance of items on functional limitations and may affect the interpretation of results from substantive studies. HIGHLIGHTS: There was substantial cross-country variation in item performance. Items from the Community Screening Instrument for Dementia (CSID) had less cross-country variability but lower performance. There was more variability in performance of instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) compared to activities of daily living (ADL) items. Variability in cultural expectations of older adults should be taken into account. Results highlight the need for novel approaches to assessing functional limitations.

The worldwide costs of dementia in 2019.

INTRODUCTION: Dementia is a leading cause of death and disability globally. Estimating total societal costs demonstrates the wide impact of dementia and its main direct and indirect economic components. METHODS: We constructed a global cost model for dementia, presenting costs as cumulated global and regional costs. RESULTS: In 2019, the annual global societal costs of dementia were estimated at US $1313.4 billion for 55.2 million people with dementia, corresponding to US $23,796 per person with dementia. Of the total, US $213.2 billion (16%) were direct medical costs, US $448.7 billion (34%) direct social sector costs (including long-term care), and US $651.4 billion (50%) costs of informal care. DISCUSSION: The huge costs of dementia worldwide place enormous strains on care systems and families alike. Although most people with dementia live in low- and middle-income countries, highest total and per-person costs are seen in high-income countries. HIGHLIGHTS: Global economic costs of dementia were estimated to reach US $1313.4 in 2019. Sixty-one percent of people with dementia live in low-and middle-income countries, whereas 74% of the costs occur in high-income countries. The impact of informal care accounts for about 50% of the global costs. The development of a long-term care infrastructure is a great challenge for low-and middle-income countries. There is a great need for more cost studies, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Discussions of a framework for global cost comparisons are needed.

Differences in the measurement of cognition for the assessment of dementia across geographic contexts: Recommendations for cross-national research.

INTRODUCTION: Most cognitive assessments have been developed in high-income countries but are used in diverse contexts. Differences in culture and context may affect the performance of cognitive items. METHODS: We used the Harmonized Cognitive Assessment Protocol (HCAP) surveys in the United States, Mexico, India, England, and South Africa (combined N = 11,364) to quantify associations across countries between cognitive items and cognitive impairment status using age- and sex-adjusted logistic regression. RESULTS: Associations were stronger in the United States (median odds ratio [OR] across items = 0.17) and England (median OR = 0.19), compared to South Africa (median OR = 0.23), India (median OR = 0.29), and Mexico (median OR = 0.28). Items assessing memory (e.g., delayed recall tasks) had the most consistent associations of the largest magnitudes across contexts. DISCUSSION: Transporting cognitive items among countries and cultures warrants caution. Our results can guide the design of future instruments by identifying items that performed well either in individual contexts or across the range of contexts considered. HIGHLIGHTS: Little quantitative evidence exists to guide the design of cognitive assessments in cross-national studies. The performance of cognitive items for the measurement of dementia varied across countries. Items with lower variation across countries (e.g., delayed word recall) should be used in future cross-national assessments. Across countries, there was variability in the performance of language assessments, with the exception of the animal naming task. Results can be used to design future cross-national or location-specific cognitive assessments.

Incidence, prevalence and disability associated with neurological disorders in Italy between 1990 and 2019: an analysis based on the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.

BACKGROUND: Neurological conditions are highly prevalent and disabling, in particular in the elderly. The Italian population has witnessed sharp ageing and we can thus expect a rising trend in the incidence, prevalence and disability of these conditions. METHODS: We relied on the Global Burden of Disease 2019 study to extract Italian data on incidence, prevalence and years lived with a disability (YLDs) referred to a broad set of neurological disorders including, brain and nervous system cancers, stroke, encephalitis, meningitis, tetanus, traumatic brain injury, and spinal cord injury. We assessed changes between 1990 and 2019 in counts and age-standardized rates. RESULTS: The most prevalent conditions were tension-type headache, migraine, and dementias, whereas the most disabling were migraine, dementias and traumatic brain injury. YLDs associated with neurological conditions increased by 22.5%, but decreased by 2.3% in age-standardized rates. The overall increase in prevalence and YLDs counts was stronger for non-communicable diseases with onset in old age compared to young to adult-age onset ones. The same trends were in the opposite direction when age-standardized rates were taken into account. CONCLUSIONS: The increase in YLDs associated with neurological conditions is mostly due to population ageing and growth: nevertheless, lived disability and, as a consequence, impact on health systems has increased. Actions are needed to improve outcome and mitigate disability associated with neurological conditions, spanning among diagnosis, treatment, care pathways and workplace interventions.

Burden of Neurological Disorders Across the US From 1990-2017: A Global Burden of Disease Study.

Importance: Accurate and up-to-date estimates on incidence, prevalence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-years (burden) of neurological disorders are the backbone of evidence-based health care planning and resource allocation for these disorders. It appears that no such estimates have been reported at the state level for the US. Objective: To present burden estimates of major neurological disorders in the US states by age and sex from 1990 to 2017. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 study. Data on incidence, prevalence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) of major neurological disorders were derived from the GBD 2017 study of the 48 contiguous US states, Alaska, and Hawaii. Fourteen major neurological disorders were analyzed: stroke, Alzheimer disease and other dementias, Parkinson disease, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, motor neuron disease, migraine, tension-type headache, traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injuries, brain and other nervous system cancers, meningitis, encephalitis, and tetanus. Exposures: Any of the 14 listed neurological diseases. Main Outcome and Measure: Absolute numbers in detail by age and sex and age-standardized rates (with 95% uncertainty intervals) were calculated. Results: The 3 most burdensome neurological disorders in the US in terms of absolute number of DALYs were stroke (3.58 [95% uncertainty interval [UI], 3.25-3.92] million DALYs), Alzheimer disease and other dementias (2.55 [95% UI, 2.43-2.68] million DALYs), and migraine (2.40 [95% UI, 1.53-3.44] million DALYs). The burden of almost all neurological disorders (in terms of absolute number of incident, prevalent, and fatal cases, as well as DALYs) increased from 1990 to 2017, largely because of the aging of the population. Exceptions for this trend included traumatic brain injury incidence (-29.1% [95% UI, -32.4% to -25.8%]); spinal cord injury prevalence (-38.5% [95% UI, -43.1% to -34.0%]); meningitis prevalence (-44.8% [95% UI, -47.3% to -42.3%]), deaths (-64.4% [95% UI, -67.7% to -50.3%]), and DALYs (-66.9% [95% UI, -70.1% to -55.9%]); and encephalitis DALYs (-25.8% [95% UI, -30.7% to -5.8%]). The different metrics of age-standardized rates varied between the US states from a 1.2-fold difference for tension-type headache to 7.5-fold for tetanus; southeastern states and Arkansas had a relatively higher burden for stroke, while northern states had a relatively higher burden of multiple sclerosis and eastern states had higher rates of Parkinson disease, idiopathic epilepsy, migraine and tension-type headache, and meningitis, encephalitis, and tetanus. Conclusions and Relevance: There is a large and increasing burden of noncommunicable neurological disorders in the US, with up to a 5-fold variation in the burden of and trends in particular neurological disorders across the US states. The information reported in this article can be used by health care professionals and policy makers at the national and state levels to advance their health care planning and resource allocation to prevent and reduce the burden of neurological disorders.

The global burden of neurological disorders: translating evidence into policy.

Neurological disorders are the leading cause of disability and the second leading cause of death worldwide. In the past 30 years, the absolute numbers of deaths and people with disabilities owing to neurological diseases have risen substantially, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries, and further increases are expected globally as a result of population growth and ageing. This rise in absolute numbers of people affected suggests that advances in prevention and management of major neurological disorders are not sufficiently effective to counter global demographic changes. Urgent measures to reduce this burden are therefore needed. Because resources for health care and research are already overstretched, priorities need to be set to guide policy makers, governments, and funding organisations to develop and implement action plans for prevention, health care, and research to tackle the growing challenge of neurological disorders.

The State of US Health, 1990-2016: Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Among US States.

Introduction: Several studies have measured health outcomes in the United States, but none have provided a comprehensive assessment of patterns of health by state. Objective: To use the results of the Global Burden of Disease Study (GBD) to report trends in the burden of diseases, injuries, and risk factors at the state level from 1990 to 2016. Design and Setting: A systematic analysis of published studies and available data sources estimates the burden of disease by age, sex, geography, and year. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prevalence, incidence, mortality, life expectancy, healthy life expectancy (HALE), years of life lost (YLLs) due to premature mortality, years lived with disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 333 causes and 84 risk factors with 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) were computed. Results: Between 1990 and 2016, overall death rates in the United States declined from 745.2 (95% UI, 740.6 to 749.8) per 100 000 persons to 578.0 (95% UI, 569.4 to 587.1) per 100 000 persons. The probability of death among adults aged 20 to 55 years declined in 31 states and Washington, DC from 1990 to 2016. In 2016, Hawaii had the highest life expectancy at birth (81.3 years) and Mississippi had the lowest (74.7 years), a 6.6-year difference. Minnesota had the highest HALE at birth (70.3 years), and West Virginia had the lowest (63.8 years), a 6.5-year difference. The leading causes of DALYs in the United States for 1990 and 2016 were ischemic heart disease and lung cancer, while the third leading cause in 1990 was low back pain, and the third leading cause in 2016 was chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Opioid use disorders moved from the 11th leading cause of DALYs in 1990 to the 7th leading cause in 2016, representing a 74.5% (95% UI, 42.8% to 93.9%) change. In 2016, each of the following 6 risks individually accounted for more than 5% of risk-attributable DALYs: tobacco consumption, high body mass index (BMI), poor diet, alcohol and drug use, high fasting plasma glucose, and high blood pressure. Across all US states, the top risk factors in terms of attributable DALYs were due to 1 of the 3 following causes: tobacco consumption (32 states), high BMI (10 states), or alcohol and drug use (8 states). Conclusions and Relevance: There are wide differences in the burden of disease at the state level. Specific diseases and risk factors, such as drug use disorders, high BMI, poor diet, high fasting plasma glucose level, and alcohol use disorders are increasing and warrant increased attention. These data can be used to inform national health priorities for research, clinical care, and policy.