Key result
WHICAP score bests CAIDE and FRS, explaining ~34% of variance in cognitive performance.
Why the study?
Many risk scores predicting cognitive decline and Alzheimer's disease were developed in largely non-Hispanic/Latino White samples, leaving their applicability in ethno-racially diverse populations unclear.
Do cardiovascular and dementia risk scores (CAIDE, FRS, WHICAP) predict cognitive performance across different ethnic groups?
Population
Multi-ethnic, rural-dwelling participants (373F:168M, 39.7% Hispanic/Latino)
Comparison
CAIDE vs FRS vs WHICAP risk scores across ethnic groups
Design
Cross-sectional study
Authors
Loading...
May inform cognitive risk assessment across ethnic groups; extends prior scores to diverse cohorts but remains hypothesis-generating.
Cross-Sectional (n=541)
Do cardiovascular and dementia risk scores (CAIDE, FRS, WHICAP) predict cognitive performance across different ethnic groups?
Effect estimate: WHICAP R2=0.34, CAIDE R2=0.17, FRS R2=0.11
p-value: p=<0.001
Established cardiovascular and dementia risk scores predict cognitive performance in diverse populations, though the predictive strength of FRS and CAIDE varies by ethnicity.
Torres et al. (2020) conducted a cross-sectional in Cognitive decline risk (n=541). Cardiovascular and dementia risk scores (CAIDE, FRS, WHICAP) was evaluated on Cognitive composite score (WHICAP R2=0.34, CAIDE R2=0.17, FRS R2=0.11, p=<0.001). The WHICAP, CAIDE, and Framingham Risk Scores were all significantly associated with worse cognitive performance, with the WHICAP score demonstrating the strongest predictive relationship (R2 = 0.34, p < 0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: