Prevalence and population attributable fractions of potentially modifiable risk factors for dementia in Canada: A cross-sectional analysis of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging.

Objectives: We investigated the prevalence and population attributable fraction (PAF) of 12 potentially modifiable risk factors for dementia in middle-aged and older Canadians.
Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 30,097 adults aged 45 to 85 with baseline data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (2011‒2015). Risk factors and associated relative risks were taken from a highly cited systematic review. We calculated the prevalence of each risk factor using sampling weights. Individual PAFs were calculated both crudely and weighted for communality, and combined PAFs were calculated using both multiplicative and additive assumptions. Analyses were stratified by household income and repeated at CLSA's first follow-up (2015‒2018).
Results: The most prevalent risk factors were physical inactivity (63.8%; 95% CI, 62.8-64.9), hypertension (32.8%; 31.7-33.8), and obesity (30.8%; 29.7-31.8). The highest crude PAFs were physical inactivity (19.9%), traumatic brain injury (16.7%), and hypertension (16.6%). The highest weighted PAFs were physical inactivity (11.6%), depression (7.7%), and hypertension (6.0%). We estimated that the 12 risk factors combined accounted for 43.4% (37.3‒49.0) of dementia cases assuming weighted multiplicative interactions and 60.9% (55.7‒65.5) assuming additive interactions. There was a clear gradient of increasing prevalence and PAF with decreasing income for 9 of the 12 risk factors.
Conclusion: The findings of this study can inform individual- and population-level dementia prevention strategies in Canada. Differences in the impact of individual risk factors between this study and other international and regional studies highlight the importance of tailoring national dementia strategies to the local distribution of risk factors.
Competing Interests: Declarations. Conflict of interest: The authors declare they have no competing interests. Ethics: This study received ethics approval from the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board (15408). Consent to participate: Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Consent for publication: NA.
(© 2024. The Author(s) under exclusive license to The Canadian Public Health Association.)