Abstract:Background: Dementia, a global health priority, has no current cure. Around 50 million people worldwide currently live with dementia, and this number is expected to treble by 2050. Some health conditions and lifestyle behaviours can increase or decrease the risk of dementia and are known as 'predictors'. Prognostic models combine such predictors to measure the risk of future dementia. Models that can accurately predict future dementia would help clinicians select high-risk adults in middle age and implement targeted risk reduction. Objectives: Our primary objective was to identify multi-domain prognostic models used in middle-aged adults (aged 45 to 65 years) for predicting dementia or cognitive impairment. Eligible multi-domain prognostic models involved two or more of the modifiable dementia predictors identified in a 2020 Lancet Commission report and a 2019 World Health Organization (WHO) report (less education, hearing loss, traumatic brain injury, hypertension, excessive alcohol intake, obesity, smoking, depression, social isolation, physical inactivity, diabetes mellitus, air pollution, poor diet, and cognitive inactivity). Our secondary objectives were to summarise the prognostic models, to appraise their predictive accuracy (discrimination and calibration) as reported in the development and validation studies, and to identify the implications of using dementia prognostic models for the management of people at a higher risk for future dementia. Search methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and ISI Web of Science Core Collection from inception until 6 June 2022. We performed forwards and backwards citation tracking of included studies using the Web of Science platform. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included development and validation studies of multi-domain prognostic models. The minimum eligible follow-up was five years. Our primary outcome was an incident clinical diagnosis of dementia based on validated diagnostic criteria, and our secondary outcome was dementia or cognitive impairment determined by any other method. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently screened the references, extracted data using a template based on the CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS), and assessed risk of bias and applicability of included studies using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST). We synthesised the C-statistics of models that had been externally validated in at least three comparable studies. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 20 eligible studies; eight were development studies and 12 were validation studies. There were 14 unique prognostic models: seven models with validation studies and seven models with development-only studies. The models included a median of nine predictors (range 6 to 34); the median number of modifiable predictors was five (range 2 to 11). The most common modifiable predictors in externally validated models were diabetes, hypertension, smoking, physical activity, and obesity. In development-only models, the most common modifiable predictors were obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and smoking. No models included hearing loss or air pollution as predictors. Nineteen studies had a high risk of bias according to the PROBAST assessment, mainly because of inappropriate analysis methods, particularly lack of reported calibration measures. Applicability concerns were low for 12 studies, as their population, predictors, and outcomes were consistent with those of interest for this review. Applicability concerns were high for nine studies, as they lacked baseline cognitive screening or excluded an age group within the range of 45 to 65 years. Only one model, Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Ageing, and Dementia (CAIDE), had been externally validated in multiple studies, allowing for meta-analysis. The CAIDE model included eight predictors (four modifiable predictors): age, education, sex, systolic blood pressure, body mass index (BMI), total cholesterol, physical activity and APOEƐ4 status. Overall, our confidence in the prediction accuracy of CAIDE was very low; our main reasons for downgrading the certainty of the evidence were high risk of bias across all the studies, high concern of applicability, non-overlapping confidence intervals (CIs), and a high degree of heterogeneity. The summary C-statistic was 0.71 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.76; 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence) for the incident clinical diagnosis of dementia, and 0.67 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.73; 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence) for dementia or cognitive impairment based on cognitive scores. Meta-analysis of calibration measures was not possible, as few studies provided these data. Authors' conclusions: We identified 14 unique multi-domain prognostic models used in middle-aged adults for predicting subsequent dementia. Diabetes, hypertension, obesity, and smoking were the most common modifiable risk factors used as predictors in the models. We performed meta-analyses of C-statistics for one model (CAIDE), but the summary values were unreliable. Owing to lack of data, we were unable to meta-analyse the calibration measures of CAIDE. This review highlights the need for further robust external validations of multi-domain prognostic models for predicting future risk of dementia in middle-aged adults.

A single risk assessment for the most common diseases of ageing, developed and validated on 10 cohort studies

Aging Metrics Incorporating Cognitive and Physical Function Capture Mortality Risk: Results from Three Prospective Cohort Studies

Sociodemographic Factors Predict Incident Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Brief Review and Empirical Study.

Development and validation of a dementia risk score in the UK Biobank and Whitehall II cohorts

Modifiable Risk Factors for Stroke, Dementia, and Late-Life Depression: A Systematic Review and DALY Weighted Risk Factors for a Composite Outcome

Estimating Dementia Risk Using Multifactorial Prediction Models

Modifiable risk factors for dementia and dementia risk profiling. A user manual for Brain Health Services—part 2 of 6

Development and Validation of 2 Composite Aging Measures Using Routine Clinical Biomarkers in the Chinese Population: Analyses from 2 Prospective Cohort Studies.

Disease-Specific Risk Models for Predicting Dementia: An Umbrella Review

Cardiovascular risk prediction in healthy older people

Identifying individuals at high risk for dementia in primary care: Development and validation of the DemRisk risk prediction model using routinely collected patient data

Feasibility of multiorgan risk prediction with routinely collected diagnostics: a prospective cohort study in the UK Biobank

Multi-domain prognostic models used in middle-aged adults without known cognitive impairment for predicting subsequent dementia

Development and validation of a risk scoring tool for predicting incident reversible cognitive frailty among community‐dwelling older adults: A prospective cohort study

Potentially modifiable risk factors for dementia and mild cognitive impairment: an umbrella review and meta-analysis

Population attributable fractions of modifiable risk factors for dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Investigating Modifiable Risk Factors Across Dementia Subtypes: Insights from the UK Biobank

SCORE2-OP risk prediction algorithms: estimating incident cardiovascular event risk in older persons in four geographical risk regions

Development and Validation of a Dementia Risk Prediction Model in the General Population: An Analysis of Three Longitudinal Studies

SEX DIFFERENCES IN A CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE RISK SCORE AND ITS COMPONENTS AS PREDICTORS FOR MULTIMORBIDITY IN THE UK BIOBANK

Assessing Risk Prediction Models Using Individual Participant Data from Multiple Studies