Cited by 142Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsHealth disparities and outcomes

Alzheimer disease in African American individuals: increased incidence or not enough data?

Open access
Barnes, Lisa L.·2022·Nature Reviews Neurology

Abstract

Research on racial differences in Alzheimer disease (AD) dementia has increased in recent years. Older African American individuals bear a disproportionate burden of AD and cognitive impairment compared with non-Latino white individuals. Tremendous progress has been made over the past two decades in our understanding of the neurobiological substrates of AD. However, owing to well-documented challenges of study participant recruitment and a persistent lack of biological data in the African American population, knowledge of the drivers of these racial disparities has lagged behind. Therapeutic targets and effective interventions for AD are increasingly sought, but without a better understanding of the disease in African American individuals, any identified treatments and/or cures will evade this rapidly growing at-risk population. In this Perspective, I introduce three key obstacles to progress in understanding racial differences in AD: uncertainty about diagnostic criteria, disparate cross-sectional and longitudinal findings; and a dearth of neuropathological data. I also highlight evidence-informed strategies to move the field forward.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41582-021-00589-3

Cites

92 of 92 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Accurately measuring the current and future Alzheimer's burden in the United States requires adequate data from Asian, Black, Hispanic, Native American, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander communities.

    “accurately measuring the current and future burden of Alzheimer's disease in the United States requires adequate data from Asian, Black, Hispanic, Native American, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander communities.214”

    From 2023 Alzheimer's disease facts and figures (2023) · cites this paper as [214]

    The Introduction says the older US population is becoming more racially and ethnically diverse and that African American individuals are under-represented in Alzheimer’s research. The Recruitment of study cohorts section calls for diverse, representative study samples. The paper does not specifically say that data from every community listed are required to measure the current and future US burden accurately; its argument focuses chiefly on African American individuals. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Without adequate data from diverse racial and ethnic groups, the current and future burden of Alzheimer's disease and Alzheimer's dementia in the United States cannot be accurately measured.

    “First, without adequate data from diverse racial and ethnic groups, the current and future burden of Alzheimer's disease and Alzheimer's dementia in the United States cannot be accurately measured.”

    From 2024 Alzheimer's disease facts and figures (2024) · cites this paper as [234]

    The Conclusion (page unavailable) says gaps and inconsistencies in data prevent confidence in estimates of how much higher Alzheimer disease incidence is among African American individuals. The Introduction (page unavailable) gives current and projected US figures, but the paper does not say that the overall current and future US burden cannot be accurately measured across diverse racial and ethnic groups. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [9]Zuelsdorff, M., Barnes, L. L., & Okonkwo, O. C. In Clinical Cultural Neuroscience: An Integrative Approach to Cross-Cultural Neuropsychology (ed. Pedraza, O.) 233–251 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2020).
  2. [82]Massey, D. S. & Denton, N. A. American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass (Harvard Univ. Press, 1993).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barnes, L. L.
Affiliations
Rush University Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Barnes, Lisa L.
Venue
Nature Reviews Neurology
Published
2021-12-06
Volume
18
Issue
1
Pages
56-62
ISSN
  • 1759-4758 (ISSN-L)
  • 1759-4766
OpenAlex
W4200594722
Cited by
142
References
92
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 13
FWCI
4.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, African Americans, racial disparities, dementia incidence, cognitive impairment, participant recruitment, neuropathology, diagnostic criteria, neural correlates, underrepresented populations in research
MeSH terms
Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Black or African American, Data Collection, Ethnicity, Humans, Middle Aged, United States, Incidence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review