Suppr超能文献

验证“生活方式对大脑健康的影响”(LIBRA)指数在英国老龄化纵向研究和马斯特里赫特衰老研究中的更新版本。

Validation of the Updated "LIfestyle for BRAin health" (LIBRA) Index in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing and Maastricht Aging Study.

机构信息

Alzheimer Centrum Limburg, Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Mental Health and Neuroscience Research Institute (MHeNs), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Department of Family Medicine, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

出版信息

J Alzheimers Dis. 2024;101(4):1237-1248. doi: 10.3233/JAD-240666.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The "LIfestyle for BRAin health" (LIBRA) index was recently updated with three new modifiable factors: hearing impairment, social contact, and sleep (LIBRA2), but has not yet been validated.

OBJECTIVE

Comparison of the performance of both LIBRA versions in predicting dementia risk.

METHODS

Longitudinal data from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) and the Maastricht Aging Study (MAAS) were used. The weighted LIBRA (11/12 factors available) and LIBRA2 (14/15 factors available) scores were calculated, with higher scores representing an unhealthier lifestyle. Dementia diagnoses were based on self- or informant reported physician diagnosis, an informant-based cognitive screening tool, registry data or test data. Cox-proportional hazards regression was used to investigate the association between LIBRA(2) scores and dementia risk. Model fit and predictive accuracy were determined using the Akaike information criterion and Harrell's C index.

RESULTS

Over an average follow-up of 8.3 years in ELSA and 17.9 years in MAAS, 346 (4.6%) and 120 (8.5%) individuals developed dementia, respectively. In ELSA, a one-point increase in LIBRA2 was associated with an 8% (1.06-1.11) higher dementia risk (LIBRA: 13%, 1.09-1.16). In MAAS, a one-point increase in LIBRA2 was associated with a 6% (1.01-1.12) higher dementia risk (LIBRA: 8%, 0.99-1.16). In ELSA, LIBRA (Harrell's C = 0.68) and LIBRA2 (Harrell's C = 0.67) performed similarly. In MAAS, LIBRA2 (Harrell's C = 0.62) performed better compared to LIBRA (Harrell's C = 0.52).

CONCLUSIONS

LIBRA2 is a better model for identifying individuals at increased dementia risk and for public health initiatives aimed at dementia risk reduction.

摘要

背景

最近,“生活方式对大脑健康的影响”(LIBRA)指数进行了更新,纳入了三个新的可改变因素:听力障碍、社会接触和睡眠(LIBRA2),但尚未经过验证。

目的

比较 LIBRA 两个版本在预测痴呆风险方面的表现。

方法

使用来自英国老龄化纵向研究(ELSA)和马斯特里赫特衰老研究(MAAS)的纵向数据。计算加权 LIBRA(可获得 11/12 个因素)和 LIBRA2(可获得 14/15 个因素)评分,得分越高代表生活方式越不健康。痴呆诊断基于自我或知情人报告的医生诊断、知情人基于认知筛查工具、登记数据或测试数据。使用 Cox 比例风险回归来研究 LIBRA2 评分与痴呆风险之间的关联。使用赤池信息量准则和哈雷尔 C 指数确定模型拟合度和预测准确性。

结果

在 ELSA 的平均随访 8.3 年和 MAAS 的平均随访 17.9 年中,分别有 346(4.6%)和 120(8.5%)人发生痴呆。在 ELSA 中,LIBRA2 评分每增加 1 分,痴呆风险增加 8%(1.06-1.11)(LIBRA:13%,1.09-1.16)。在 MAAS 中,LIBRA2 评分每增加 1 分,痴呆风险增加 6%(1.01-1.12)(LIBRA:8%,0.99-1.16)。在 ELSA 中,LIBRA(哈雷尔 C=0.68)和 LIBRA2(哈雷尔 C=0.67)表现相似。在 MAAS 中,LIBRA2(哈雷尔 C=0.62)的表现优于 LIBRA(哈雷尔 C=0.52)。

结论

LIBRA2 是一种更好的模型,可以识别痴呆风险增加的个体,并为旨在降低痴呆风险的公共卫生计划提供参考。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d6fb/11492037/c74a401de47c/jad-101-jad240666-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验