Bell, J. Simon

AbstractINTRODUCTIONIdentifying individuals with dementia is crucial for prevalence estimation and service planning, but reliable, scalable methods are lacking. We developed novel set algorithms using both structured and unstructured electronic health record (EHR) data, applying Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders criteria for dementia case identification.METHODSOur cohort (n = 1082) included individuals aged ≥ 60 with dementia identified through specialist clinics and a comparison group without dementia. Clinicians from Australia and the United States informed predictor selection. We developed algorithms through a biostatistics stream for structured data and a natural language processing (NLP) stream for text, synthesizing results via logistic regression.RESULTSThe final structured model retained 16 variables (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] 0.853, specificity 72.2%, sensitivity 80.6%). NLP classifiers (logistic regression, support vector machine, and random forest models) performed comparably. The final, combined model outperformed all others (AUC = 0.951, P < 0.001 for comparison to structured model).DISCUSSIONEmbedding text‐derived insights within algorithms trained on structured medical data significantly enhances dementia identification capacity.Highlights Algorithmic tools for detection of individuals with dementia are available; however, previous work has used heterogeneous case definitions which are not clinically meaningful, and has relied on proxies such as diagnostic codes or medications for case ascertainment. We used a novel, dual‐stream algorithmic development approach, simultaneously and separately modeling a clinically meaningful outcome (diagnosis of dementia according to specialized clinical impression) using structured and unstructured electronic health record datasets. Our clinically grounded case definition supported the inclusion of key structured variables (such as dementia International Classification of Disease codes and medications) as modeling predictors rather than outcomes. Our algorithms, published in detail to support validation and replication, represent a major step forward in the use of routinely collected data for detection of diagnosed dementia.

AbstractBackgroundPopulation dementia prevalence is traditionally estimated using cohort studies, surveys, routinely‐collected administrative data, and registries. Hospital Electronic Health Records (EHRs) are comprised of rich structured and unstructured (text) clinical data that are underutilised for this purpose.We aimed to develop a suite of algorithms using routinely‐collected EHR data to reliably identify cases of dementia, as a key step towards incorporating such data in prevalence estimation. Towards this, we developed a novel predictive framework integrating data‐science and biostatistical methods.MethodTraining data were sourced via the National Centre for Healthy Ageing (NCHA) Data Platform, a linked, curated, EHR‐derived data warehouse. Individuals within the platform catchment aged >60 years with confirmed dementia were identified through hospital specialist dementia clinics. A comparison group of individuals aged >60years with EHR records without dementia was recruited from the community.A panel of clinical experts (Neurology, Geriatric Medicine) informed variable and concept selection and guided data cleaning efforts within both streams. Algorithms were developed via two work‐streams; a traditional biostatistical approach to fit logistic regression models using structured data elements, and a data science stream used Natural Language Processing (NLP) to fit models to the unstructured (text) parts of the EHR, for the same individuals.ResultOf 568 individuals (362 with dementia), 434 had clinical notes available. In the data science stream using unstructured data, among a range of NLP derived models, the Random Forest classifier performed best in assigning dementia status, with Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0.95, specificity 90.2% and sensitivity 88.4%. In the biostatistics stream, 15 structured variables were included in the final model, covering demographics, health service attendance, medications, and ICD‐10 Codes, with AUC 0.94, specificity 85.9% and sensitivity 85.6%.ConclusionArtificial intelligence techniques applied to unstructured electronic health data and guided by human clinical expertise may be powerful tools in capturing the presence of dementia, at least comparable to traditional techniques using structured data, and conferring practical and scientific advantages for dementia prevalence estimation. Future validation is required in less crisply delineated real‐world settings.

Background: Psychotic symptoms are common in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and related neurodegenerative disorders and are associated with more rapid disease progression and increased mortality. It is unclear to what degree existing criteria are utilized in clinical research and practice. Objective: To establish research criteria for the diagnosis of psychosis in AD. Methods: The International Society to Advance Alzheimer’s Research and Treatment (ISTAART) Neuropsychiatric Symptoms (NPS) Professional Interest Area (PIA) psychosis subgroup reviewed existing criteria for psychosis in AD and related dementias. Through a series of in person and on-line meetings, a priority checklist was devised to capture features necessary for current research and clinical needs. PubMed, Medline and other relevant databases were searched for relevant criteria. Results: Consensus identified three sets of criteria suitable for review including those of Jeste and Finkel, Lyketsos, and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, 5th edition. It was concluded that existing criteria could be augmented by including a more specific differentiation between delusions and hallucinations, address overlap with related conditions (agitation in particular), adding the possibility of symptoms emerging in the preclinical and prodromal phases, and building on developing research in disease biomarkers. Conclusion: We propose criteria, developed to improve phenotypic classification of psychosis in AD, and advance the research agenda in the field to improve epidemiological, biomarker, and genetics research in the field. These criteria serve as a complement to the International Psychogeriatric Association criteria for psychosis in neurocognitive disorders.

Abstract Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRDs) are a global crisis facing the aging population and society as a whole. With the numbers of people with ADRDs predicted to rise dramatically across the world, the scientific community can no longer neglect the need for research focusing on ADRDs among underrepresented ethnoracial diverse groups. The Alzheimer's Association International Society to Advance Alzheimer's Research and Treatment (ISTAART; alz.org/ISTAART ) comprises a number of professional interest areas (PIAs), each focusing on a major scientific area associated with ADRDs. We leverage the expertise of the existing international cadre of ISTAART scientists and experts to synthesize a cross‐PIA white paper that provides both a concise “state‐of‐the‐science” report of ethnoracial factors across PIA foci and updated recommendations to address immediate needs to advance ADRD science across ethnoracial populations.

Abstract Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) in Alzheimer's disease (AD) are widespread and disabling. This has been known since Dr. Alois Alzheimer's first case, Frau Auguste D., presented with emotional distress and delusions of infidelity/excessive jealousy, followed by cognitive symptoms. Being cognizant of this, in 2010 the Alzheimer's Association convened a research roundtable on the topic of NPS in AD. A major outcome of the roundtable was the founding of a Professional Interest Area (PIA) within the International Society to Advance Alzheimer's Research and Treatment (ISTAART). The NPS‐PIA has prepared a series of documents that are intended to summarize the literature and provide more detailed specific recommendations for NPS research. This overview paper is the first of these living documents that will be updated periodically as the science advances. The overview is followed by syndrome‐specific synthetic reviews and recommendations prepared by NPS‐PIA workgroups on depression, apathy, sleep, agitation, and psychosis.