Predicting Cognitive Decline: Comparative Analysis of ANU-ADRI, CAIDE, CogDrisk, LIBRA, LIBRA2, UKBDRS and Lancet Based Dementia Risk Scores in the HUNT Study - 24/02/26

Doi : 10.1016/j.tjpad.2026.100524

Josephine Stubs ^a,^b,^c,^⁎ , Geir Selbæk ^a,^b,^c, Bjørn Heine Strand ^a,^b,^d, Gill Livingston ^e,^f, Kaarin J. Anstey ^g,^h,ⁱ, Kay Deckers ^j, Mika Kivimäki ^e,^k, Steinar Krokstad ^l,^m, Fiona E. Mathews ⁿ, Ellen Melbye Langballe ^a,^b

^a Norwegian National Centre for Aging and Health, Vestfold Hospital Trust, Tønsberg, Aldring og helse, 103 Tønsberg, Norway

^b Department of Geriatric Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Kirkeveien 166, 0450 Oslo Norway

^c Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Kirkeveien 166, 0450 Oslo, Norway

^d Department of Physical Health and Aging, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway

^e Division of Psychiatry, 149 Tottenham Court Rd, University College London, London, W1W 7EJ UK

^f North London NHS Foundation Trust, St Pancras Hospital, London, NW1 0PE UK

^g School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

^h Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia

ⁱ UNSW Ageing Futures Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

^j Alzheimer Centrum Limburg, Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Mental Health and Neuroscience Research Institute (MHeNs), Maastricht University, Dr. Tanslaan 12, 6229 ET, Maastricht, The Netherlands

^k Department of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Tukholmankatu 8 B, FI-00014, Finland

^l Department of Public Health and Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, HUNT Research Centre, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway

^m Levanger Hospital, Nord-Trøndelag Hospital Trust, Levanger, Norway

ⁿ Institute for Clinical and Applied Health Research, University of Hull, Cottingham Road, Hull, HU6 7RX, UK

^⁎ Corresponding author.

connettersi o creare un account

Benvenuto su EM|consulte, il riferimento dei professionisti della salute.
Articolo gratuito.

Si connetta per beneficiarne

In corso di stampa. Manoscritto Accettato. Disponibile online dal Tuesday 24 February 2026
This article has been published in an issue click here to access

Highlights

•	Eight dementia risk scores and a demographics model were compared longitudinally.
•	UKBDRS, LIBRA, ANU-ADRI best predicted cognition 11 years after risk assessment.
•	Lancet, UKBDRS, ANU-ADRI best predicted 4-year cognitive decline.
•	UKBDRS, CogDrisk, Lancet best predicted who would get significant cognitive decline.
•	No risk score outperformed age and education alone in predicting cognitive decline.

Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate and compare the predictive value of eight dementia risk scores for late-life cognitive function and cognitive decline; ANU-ADRI, CAIDE, CogDrisk, LIBRA, LIBRA2, UKBDRS(-APOE), and a Lancet commission-based risk score.

Methods

Using Norwegian Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT) data, we calculated risk scores from lifestyle and health data of 7221 dementia-free participants (mean age: 76.8 years, 54.1% female) collected in HUNT3 (2006-2008). Cognitive function was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment scale (MoCA) 11 years later in HUNT4-70+, and reassessed in 4716 participants 4 years thereafter. Associations between continuous risk scores or risk score tertiles, cognition and cognitive decline were examined using linear mixed-effects models. Logistic regression models were used to test associations between risk scores and a ≥3-point decline in MoCA scores.

Results

All risk scores were significantly associated with cognitive function and cognitive decline. Associations with cognitive function ranged from UKBDRS β _{per 1SD} =-1.61(95%CI:-1.72,-1.51) to CAIDE (β=-0.74;95%CI:-0.82,-0.67), and with yearly cognitive decline from Lancet (β=-0.23;95%CI:-0.27,-0.18) to CAIDE (β=-0.04;95%CI:-0.07,-0.02). High-low risk group differences in cognitive function were largest for CogDrisk (β=-3.04;95%CI:-3.27,-2.81), LIBRA (β=-3.04;95%CI:-3.27,-2.80) and lowest for CAIDE (β=-1.65;95%CI:-1.86,-1.44). High-risk groups showed the steepest decline for UKBDRS-APOE (β=-0.43;95%CI:-0.52,-0.34), Lancet (β=-0.39;95%CI:-0.48,-0.30), and LIBRA (β=-0.38;95%CI:-0.47,-0.28). All scores predicted ≥3-point decline modestly: AUCs were highest for UKBDRS (AUC=0.61;95%CI:0.60,0.63), UKBDRS-APOE (0.61;95%CI:0.60,0.63), CogDrisk (0.60;95%CI:0.58,0.62), and Lancet (0.60;95%CI:0.58,0.61), but none outperformed a model including age and education alone (0.61;95%CI:0.60,0.63).

Conclusion

Risk scores captured meaningful gradients in cognition and decline but offered limited discriminatory accuracy beyond demographics, supporting their use for prevention-oriented risk profiling rather than prediction.

Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.

Keywords : Dementia Risk Index, Modifiable risk factors, HUNT, Lifestyle Risk, Ageing, Cognitive Decline