Skip to main content
Advertisement
  • Neurology.org
  • Journals
    • Neurology
    • Clinical Practice
    • Education
    • Genetics
    • Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • Online Sections
    • Neurology Video Journal Club
    • Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Anti-racism, & Social Justice (IDEAS)
    • Innovations in Care Delivery
    • Practice Buzz
    • Practice Current
    • Residents & Fellows
    • Without Borders
  • Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Disputes & Debates
    • Health Disparities
    • Infographics
    • Neurology Future Forecasting Series
    • Null Hypothesis
    • Patient Pages
    • Topics A-Z
    • Translations
  • Podcast
  • CME
  • About
    • About the Journals
    • Contact Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Center

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Neurology.org
  • Journals
    • Neurology
    • Clinical Practice
    • Education
    • Genetics
    • Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • Online Sections
    • Neurology Video Journal Club
    • Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Anti-racism, & Social Justice (IDEAS)
    • Innovations in Care Delivery
    • Practice Buzz
    • Practice Current
    • Residents & Fellows
    • Without Borders
  • Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Disputes & Debates
    • Health Disparities
    • Infographics
    • Neurology Future Forecasting Series
    • Null Hypothesis
    • Patient Pages
    • Topics A-Z
    • Translations
  • Podcast
  • CME
  • About
    • About the Journals
    • Contact Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Center
  • Home
  • Latest Articles
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Neurology Video Journal Club
  • Residents & Fellows

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My Alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out

Search

  • Advanced search
Neurology
Home
The most widely read and highly cited peer-reviewed neurology journal
  • Subscribe
  • My Alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out
Site Logo
  • Home
  • Latest Articles
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Neurology Video Journal Club
  • Residents & Fellows

Share

August 01, 1996; 47 (2) ARTICLES

Predictors of mortality in patients diagnosed with probable Alzheimer's disease

J. D. Bowen, A. D. Malter, L. Sheppard, W. A. Kukull, W. C. McCormick, L. Teri, E. B. Larson
First published August 1, 1996, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.47.2.433
J. D. Bowen
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
A. D. Malter
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
L. Sheppard
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
W. A. Kukull
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
W. C. McCormick
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
L. Teri
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
E. B. Larson
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Full PDF
Citation
Predictors of mortality in patients diagnosed with probable Alzheimer's disease
J. D. Bowen, A. D. Malter, L. Sheppard, W. A. Kukull, W. C. McCormick, L. Teri, E. B. Larson
Neurology Aug 1996, 47 (2) 433-439; DOI: 10.1212/WNL.47.2.433

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Permissions

Make Comment

See Comments

Downloads
75

Share

  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Disclosures
Loading

Abstract

Objective: We sought to identify factors associated with mortality in persons recently diagnosed with probable Alzheimer's disease (AD). Background: Predicting mortality in AD is needed both in patient care and public health planning. Previous studies have identified several factors which contribute to mortality in AD, but few longitudinal studies of population-based cohorts exist. Methods: In a longitudinal follow-up study 327 patients with newly diagnosed probable AD (mean Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] score of 20) from a large, stable health maintenance organization were identified. Demographic characteristics, dementia severity, and comorbid conditions were identified at enrollment. Patients were followed longitudinally (median 3.3 years, total 898 person-years). Baseline characteristics were used to predict survival in univariate and multivariate models. Results: Increased mortality was seen in patients with probable AD (9.0 deaths per 100 person-years) compared with the community population adjusted for age and gender (4.3 deaths per 100 person-years). On univariate analysis we found increased age, male gender, impairment on MMSE or Blessed dementia rating scale (DRS), rate of MMSE decline, wandering or agitation, vascular disease, and sensory impairment affecting the ability to read or hear to be moderately associated with decreased survival. After adjusting for age and gender in a multivariate model, Blessed DRS score and sensory impairment affecting the ability to read were independently associated with decreased survival. Conclusions: Short-term mortality is increased in patients newly diagnosed with probable AD. Measures of dementia severity, measures of general debility, and vascular disease are associated with increased mortality. Of these, general debility and sensory impairment were more strongly associated with shortened survival.

NEUROLOGY 1996;47: 433-439

Physicians and public health planners are often asked to predict mortality in patients diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease (AD). Unfortunately, there are few studies to guide these predictions, and published findings often do not apply to general patient populations. Many study populations consist of subjects from geriatric or dementia clinics, psychiatric hospitals, or nursing homes. These populations are often biased with over-representation of advanced or early cases. [1] Other biases include the elimination of patients with comorbid conditions and the use of prevalent rather than incident cases. Few studies have evaluated predictors of mortality in incident cases [2,3] within a community-based population. [4,5]

Several factors seem to contribute to mortality in patients with AD. The age and gender of the patient, as well as the age at disease onset, are often cited. [5-15] Some investigators have linked mortality to AD markers, such as the severity of cognitive loss [4,7,9,10,12,15-17] or the degree of language impairment. [10,18] General debility [8,15,16,19-21] or behavioral changes [9,16,22] have been associated with decreased survival. Finally, comorbid conditions, particularly vascular disease, are often a major contributor to mortality in elderly patients, including those with dementia. [4,8,18,20]

This study examines mortality in a cohort of patients with AD. This population-based cohort enrolls incident cases in whom dementia has recently become diagnosed. Mortality in these demented patients was compared with that in the general population in the same county. We used univariate and multivariate models to determine baseline characteristics associated with early mortality.

Methods.

Subjects with previously undiagnosed cognitive impairment were identified within a geographically defined portion of a large health maintenance organization (Group Health Cooperative). [23,24] The Seattle area membership of Group Health Cooperative includes approximately 23,000 persons aged >or=to60 years. In this age group, attrition is approximately 1% per year, excluding deaths. The Alzheimer's Disease Patient Registry (ADPR) seeks to identify all new cases of dementia as they are observed by or brought to the attention of primary care physicians, specialty clinics, or other disciplines within the medical care setting. Two independent surveillance strategies have been developed: the marker event strategy and the primary care physician contact strategy. The marker event strategy includes routine review of areas where demented patients are likely to appear for medical care, including neurology, CT brain scans, admission and discharge records, mental health clinics, emergency rooms, and the computerized Treatment Record Form of all clinic visits. The primary care physician contact strategy consists of directed publicity about the study, especially monthly letters to physicians describing interesting research findings and reminding physicians to refer persons with newly recognized dementia symptoms. Approximately 40% of ADPR enrollees enter through the primary care physician contact strategy. The records of persons identified through screening strategies are reviewed to eliminate persons obviously ineligible for enrollment. Approximately 20% of subjects identified through the surveillance network decline to allow their names to be released to the ADPR, and an additional 14% decline to provide informed consent. A follow-up review of the medical records of these persons indicated that they were slightly older (mean age 80 years), more likely to be female (about two-thirds are women), and less likely to be currently married (40% married). Roughly one-half of the refusals had a diagnosis consistent with AD. Enrollees underwent a standardized diagnostic evaluation performed by ADPR physicians and psychologists. [24] Cases were followed annually and retested to verify the diagnoses. Diagnosis was accomplished by consensus of at least two physicians and one psychologist. Only those ADPR enrollees meeting National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke-Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association (NINCDS-ADRDA) criteria for probable AD [25] were included in the current analysis. Those cases categorized as possible AD, non-AD dementia, or not demented were excluded from the study.

Demographic and medical history variables were selected from a comprehensive set of measures gathered at the time of enrollment and clinical examination, including demographic variables, measures of dementia severity, and comorbid conditions. Demographic variables included age, gender, and education. Three education categories were used, including lower than high school, high school, and higher than high school. Measures of dementia severity included Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores, [26] Blessed dementia rating scale (DRS) scores, [27] Boston naming test scores, rate of cognitive decline, and presence of wandering or agitation. [16] The rate of cognitive decline was estimated using MMSE decline (30 minus MMSE score at enrollment) occurring since the time of symptom onset (estimated by the patient and proxy during the initial interview). Comorbid conditions included heart disease, diabetes, hypertension, smoking, alcohol use, reported weight loss, head trauma, and sensory impairment affecting the ability to hear or read. Smoking was analyzed both as ``smoked'' versus ``never smoked'' and as ``currently'' versus ``not currently'' smoking. Alcohol use was analyzed both as ``used'' versus ``never used'' and as ``currently using'' versus ``not using'' alcohol. Weight loss was evaluated using a decrease of 10% or greater in body weight reported by the patient or proxy. Sensory impairment affecting the ability to hear [28] or read [29] was evaluated using validated bedside clinical screening questions completed by the proxy. Vascular comorbid conditions were evaluated both separately and as a combined variable, including heart disease, hypertension, and diabetes. Most variables were categorized as present or not present when examining their main effect on survival. Age, education, rate of symptom progression, Blessed DRS, MMSE, and the Boston naming test were categorized in tertiles. Age and MMSE and Blessed DRS scores were used as continuous variables when entered in multivariate models. Survival intervals were calculated from the date of enrollment to the date of death. For those patients still alive at final follow-up, survival intervals were censored at that time. The source population for the ADPR is similar to the surrounding metropolitan population with regard to age (13% aged >or=to65 years in both groups), gender (55% vs. 51% female), and ethnicity (91% vs. 90% white). [30] Nine percent of the source population had <12 years of education (vs. 18%) and 34% had >15 years of education (vs. 24%). The annual income of the source population in 1994 U.S. dollars was less than $15,000 in 20% (vs. 23%) and more than $50,000 in 13% (vs. 19%). The source population was more likely to be married (67%) than the surrounding metropolitan population (56%). The mortality of this cohort was compared with that of the surrounding county (King County). Because mortality rates are available for King County residents only in those <85 years of age, it was necessary to restrict information contributed by cohort members to information prior to their 85th birthday. For King County residents, age- and gender-specific death rates for each 5-year age group (in which patients were included) were applied to the age-gender distribution of our AD case sample to obtain expected deaths.

The survival analysis was done using proportional hazards regression techniques. Initially, each baseline characteristic was screened using a univariate unstratified proportional hazards regression or a log-rank test, or both, based on stratifying the survival data by the covariate of interest. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to illustrate the univariate results. Significant prognostic factors identified in the univariate analyses were then candidates for inclusion in multivariate models. Age and gender were considered important confounders of the association between prognostic factors and survival and were included in the multivariate models, regardless of associations found in the univariate analyses. For confounding adjustment, models were stratified by gender because there was evidence that the gender-specific hazards were not proportional. Age was incorporated in the linear predictor as a continuous variable with both linear and (centered) quadratic terms.

The measure of disease severity most strongly associated with survival was the Blessed DRS. We searched for important prognostic factors in survival beyond the effects of disease severity; in those models, Blessed DRS was included as a covariate. Other predictors from the univariate analyses were then evaluated in the multivariate proportional hazards model if they were clinically significant and showed a trend toward statistical significance (p <or=to 0.15). Predictors were included in the final model only if they were statistically significant (p <or=to 0.05). A search for influential observations, assessments of a good fit, and tests for interactions were done. There was no evidence in the data that it was necessary to develop different models of survival based on baseline dementia severity. SAS and Splus software were used.

Results.

Of the 766 patients enrolled in the ADPR between 1987 and 1993, 327 were diagnosed with probable AD and included in this study. The baseline demographic and medical characteristics of these patients are shown in Table 1. The average age at entry was 79 years, and the mean MMSE score at enrollment was 20 (first and third quartiles 16 and 23, respectively). The interval from enrollment to final follow-up ranged from 0.1 to 6.5 years (median 3.3, first and third quartiles 1.4 and 4.0, respectively). There were 898 person-years of follow-up.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint

Table 1. Baseline characteristics of 327 patients with probable AD

Of the 327 cases with probable AD, 93 died, 23 occurring during the first year and 51 during the first 2 years of follow-up. The unadjusted mortality for the cohort was 10.2 per 100 person-years. In the group <85 years of age, 60 deaths were observed during 668 person-years of follow-up (9.0 deaths per 100 person-years). The expected number of deaths in King County residents <85 years of age, given the same age and gender distribution, was 29 (4.3 per 100 person-years). The ratio of observed to expected deaths (Standardized Mortality Ratio) was 2.1.

Univariate analysis results are presented in Table 2. Among demographic variables, age and male gender were associated with shortened survival. Among the measures of disease severity, MMSE score, Blessed DRS score, rate of symptom progression, and wandering or agitation were associated with shortened survival. Comorbid conditions associated with shortened survival included sensory impairment affecting hearing and reading. Individual markers of vascular disease, including heart disease, diabetes, and hypertension, were not associated with shortened survival. A variable combining vascular disease, diabetes, and hypertension was modestly associated with shortened survival. Baseline variables not associated with shortened survival from the univariate comparisons included education level, Boston naming test scores, smoking, alcohol use, weight loss, head trauma, and depression.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint

Table 2. Relative increase in mortality for Alzheimer's disease patients with selected baseline characteristics

After adjustment for age and gender stratification, functional limitation, as measured by the Blessed DRS, had the strongest association with shortened survival in the multivariate model. After inclusion of the Blessed DRS, sensory impairment affecting reading was also significantly associated with shortened survival (see Table 2). This model was improved when the interaction between Blessed DRS score and age was entered. However, the data presented in Table 2 do not include this interaction. A combined variable for heart disease, hypertension, and diabetes was associated with shortened survival after adjusting for age and gender (p = 0.04), but did not remain significant after inclusion of Blessed DRS and sensory impairment affecting reading. Additional variables were not independently associated with shortened survival. The relative risks for mortality based on age and Blessed DRS score are shown in Table 3. The interaction indicates that risk is lower for the oldest patients with high Blessed DRS scores relative to the risk for younger patients with high Blessed DRS scores. Figure 1 shows the effect on shortened survival of sensory impairment affecting the ability to read in female cohort members.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint

Table 3. Age-specific relative risk of mortality for three ages by Blessed DRS score and reading impairment based on the final model

Figure
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier plot of sensory impairment affecting the ability to read in female cohort members based on a fixed Blessed dementia rating scale score and age.

Discussion.

Our patients with newly diagnosed AD had increased mortality compared with the age- and sex-adjusted general population from the same county. On univariate analysis, mortality was associated with age, gender, MMSE score, Blessed DRS score, rate of symptom progression, wandering or agitation, heart disease or diabetes, and sensory impairment affecting reading or hearing. In a multivariate model adjusted for age and gender, the Blessed DRS score (indicating cognitive and physical impairment due to dementia) had the strongest association with shortened survival. After inclusion of the Blessed DRS score in the model, only sensory impairment affecting reading contributed significantly to the survival model. Patients with heart disease or diabetes had a modest increase in mortality, which was not statistically significant at the 0.05 level.

Several measures of debility were associated with shortened survival in our screening analysis. Although often used as a measure of overall cognitive decline, the Blessed DRS also measures debility affecting activities of daily living. The baseline Blessed DRS had the strongest association, with subsequent mortality, of any variable. Measures of debility that have been associated with increased mortality in other studies include the Blessed DRS, [31] the clinical dementia rating scale, [21] an activities of daily living scale, [15] decreased grip strength, [20] and severe physical impairment, unstable gait, and falls. [19]

Sensory impairment not only impacts a patient's interest and pleasure in life but may also have a particularly detrimental effect in demented patients who are already suffering from a decreased ability to process environmental stimuli. Sensory impairment affecting reading or hearing was associated with decreased survival on univariate analysis. Other investigators have found a similar association between survival and debility. Walsh et al. [16] reported that hearing but not visual loss was associated with increased mortality, but the association was not retained in a multivariate model including age. Van Dijk et al. [8] reported both hearing and visual impairment to be associated with mortality. These variables likely serve as markers for general debility rather than affecting mortality directly.

Wandering or agitation was associated with mortality on univariate analysis. Behavioral changes have been associated with mortality in a number of studies, [9,22] including wandering or falling, [16] irritability or nocturnal disruptive behaviors, [15] and dependency, physical disability, and inactivity. [8]

Increased dementia severity has been associated with increased mortality. [4,7,9,10,12,15-17] MMSE score was associated with mortality in this study, but the association was weaker than that seen with the Blessed DRS, possibly because the Blessed DRS includes measures of functional ability as well as cognition. The estimated rate of MMSE decline was associated with increased mortality on univariate analysis but not in a multivariate model. The difficulty in estimating the age of dementia onset may have attenuated the effect on survival of rate of MMSE decline. Direct measures of cognitive decline over time would be preferable. Specific areas of cognitive dysfunction, such as language dysfunction, have been associated with mortality in some studies, [10,18,31] but not in our cohort of patients with early dementia.

Other comorbid conditions have frequently been associated with mortality in dementia. We found a vascular disease variable (presence of myocardial infarction, angina, diabetes, or hypertension) to be associated with increased mortality only after adjusting for age, gender, and Blessed DRS score. This variable was not associated with mortality on univariate analysis. Although related to mortality in the present study, comorbid vascular conditions were overwhelmed by the effects of age, gender, and debility. Other workers have similarly found an association between mortality and vascular factors, such as hypertension, [20] cardiovascular disease, [8] pulse pressure, and ischemia score, [18] but these findings are not universal. [8,9,20] Nonvascular comorbid conditions were associated with mortality in some studies [8,19] but not in others. [16] Cachexia has been associated with poor survival in some studies, [4,18] but we did not find weight loss to be significant as defined in this study, probably because our subjects showed early signs of dementia. Cachexia may only become a significant problem in relatively long-surviving cases. The weak association with these comorbid conditions in our study might be strengthened by larger numbers of subjects or longer follow-up.

The mortality we observed among patients with AD was about twice that of the age- and gender-adjusted death rate of the surrounding county. Others have also noted similar increases in mortality with dementia. [5,9,10,19] Schoenberg et al. [3] found an increase of 23% after 5 years and 57% after 10 years in a study of population-based incident cases. In incident subjects <60 years of age, Treves et al. [2] found a 60% increase in mortality with dementia. In a prevalence study of noninstitutionalized subjects, Evans et al. [4] found a 53% mortality rate in those with probable AD compared with 24% in control subjects.

The cohort selected for this study overcomes limitations found in many previous studies. Our use of sequential newly recognized cases from a health maintenance organization minimizes the selection bias noted in studies of dementia clinic, psychiatric hospital, and nursing home populations. [1] The use of incident cases allows survival to be evaluated in earlier stages of the disease, thus avoiding to some extent, the obvious increased mortality of those with advanced dementia. [1] Rapidly progressing cases are not excluded from the present study, although they may be under-represented in prevalence-based cross-sectional studies. [1] Our population should be more representative of patients seen in the offices of primary care providers after their first diagnosis of AD, compared with the populations used in many previous studies.

This study has some limitations. Our survey methods are limited in that only those patients with suspected dementia were screened; thus, some demented patients in the population may not have been identified as cases. Because these cases did not come to medical attention, their exclusion should not affect the applicability of these results in most clinical settings. Our results apply only to short-term mortality in those newly diagnosed with AD and should only be extended to patients with advanced disease with caution. Although our cohort is large, we may have had insufficient power to detect a true difference with some variables that were uncommon in this population (e.g., individual vascular variables). False associations between survival and baseline variables could occur by chance owing to the analysis of multiple variables. We minimized this risk by including only a reduced subset of variables selected a priori from a larger list of variables and by selecting variables to address specific hypotheses. Many of these variables were suggested in previously published studies, such as duration and severity of dementia, [4,7,9,10,12,15-17] cachexia, [4,18] language skills, [10,18] hearing deficit, [16] and wandering or falling. [16] For other characteristics, we based selection on a likelihood that they might affect survival, including a history of heart disease, hypertension, and diabetes.

This study should provide useful information about survival in patients newly diagnosed with AD. Although there are many risk factors for mortality in this elderly population, the factor with the greatest potential for modification is general debility. For care givers, our results suggest that efforts should be made to minimize debility. Providing hearing and visual aids, improving physical conditioning, optimizing function in activities of daily living, and addressing behavioral changes of dementia may be considered. Further study will be needed to determine whether minimizing general levels of debility in those with early AD affects longevity or improves functional well-being.

  • Copyright 1996 by Advanstar Communications Inc.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Jorm AF. The epidemiology of Alzheimer's disease and related disorders. New York: Chapman and Hall, 1990.
  2. 2.↵
    Treves T, Korczyn AD, Zilber N, Kahana E, Leibowitz Y, Schoenberg BS. Presenile dementia in Israel. Arch Neurol 1986;43:26-29.
    OpenUrl
  3. 3.↵
    Schoenberg BS, Okazaki H, Kokmen E. Reduced survival in patients with dementia: a population study. Trans Am Neurol Assoc 1981;106:306-308.
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.↵
    Evans DA, Smith LA, Scherr PA, Albert MS, Funkenstein HH, Hebert LE. Risk of death from Alzheimer's disease in a community population of older persons. Am J Epidemiol 1991;134:403-412.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    Molsa PK, Marttila RJ, Rinne UK. Survival and cause of death in Alzheimer's disease and multi-infarct dementia. Acta Neurol Scand 1986;74:103-107.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.
    Brodaty H, McGilchrist C, Harris L, Peters KE. Time until institutionalization and death in patients with dementia. Role of caregiver training and risk factors. Arch Neurol 1993;50:643-650.
    OpenUrl
  7. 7.
    Volicer BJ, Hurley A, Fabiszewski KJ, Montgomery P, Volicer L. Predicting short-term survival for patients with advanced Alzheimer's disease. J Am Geriatr Soc 1993;41:535-540.
    OpenUrl
  8. 8.↵
    van Dijk PT, van de Sande HJ, Dippel DW, Habbema JD. The nature of excess mortality in nursing home patients with dementia. J Gerontol 1992;47:M28-34.
    OpenUrl
  9. 9.↵
    Barclay LL, Zemcov A, Blass JP, McDowell FH. Factors associated with duration of survival in Alzheimer's disease. Biol Psychiatry 1985;20:86-93.
    OpenUrl
  10. 10.↵
    Heyman A, Wilkinson WE, Hurwitz BJ, et al. Early-onset Alzheimer's disease: clinical predictors of institutionalization and death. Neurology 1987;37:980-984.
    OpenUrl
  11. 11.
    Naguib M, Levy R. Prediction of outcome in senile dementia--a computed tomography study. Br J Psychiatry 1982;140:263-267.
    OpenUrl
  12. 12.
    Colgan J. Regional density and survival in senile dementia. Br J Psychiatry 1985;147:63-66.
    OpenUrl
  13. 13.
    Berg L, Miller JP, Storandt M, et al. Mild senile dementia of the Alzheimer type: 2. Longitudinal assessment. Ann Neurol 1988;23:477-484.
    OpenUrl
  14. 14.
    Perls TT, Morris JN, Ooi WL, Lipsitz LA. The relationship between age, gender and cognitive performance in the very old: the effect of selective survival. J Am Geriatr Soc 1993;41:1193-1201.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    Knopman DS, Kitto J, Deinard S, Heiring J. Longitudinal study of death and institutionalization in patients with primary degenerative dementia. J Am Geriatr Soc 1988;36:108-112.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    Walsh JS, Welch HG, Larson EB. Survival of outpatients with Alzheimer-type dementia. Ann Intern Med 1990;113:429-434.
    OpenUrl
  17. 17.
    Berg S, Jeppson L. Cognitive functioning and survival in psychogeriatric patients. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1991;84:160-162.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    Nielsen H, Lolk A, Pedersen I, Autzen M, Sennef C, Kragh-Sorensen P. The accuracy of early diagnosis and predictors of death in Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia--a follow-up study. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1991;84:277-282.
    OpenUrl
  19. 19.↵
    Martin DC, Miller JK, Kapoor W, Arena VC, Boller F. A controlled study of survival with dementia. Arch Neurol 1987;44:1122-1126.
    OpenUrl
  20. 20.↵
    Hier DB, Warach JD, Gorelick PB, Thomas J. Predictors of survival in clinically diagnosed Alzheimer's disease and multi-infarct dementia. Arch Neurol 1989;46:1213-1216.
    OpenUrl
  21. 21.↵
    Burns A, Jacoby R, Levy R. Progression of cognitive impairment in Alzheimer's disease. J Am Geriatr Soc 1991;39:39-45.
    OpenUrl
  22. 22.
    Diesfeldt HFA, van Houte LR, Moerkens RM. Duration of survival in senile dementia. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1986;73:366-371.
    OpenUrl
  23. 23.↵
    Kukull WA, Larson EB, Bowen JD, et al. Solvent exposure as a risk factor for Alzheimer's disease: a case-control study. Am J Epidemiol 1995;141:1059-1071.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    Larson EB, Kukull WA, Teri L, et al. The University of Washington Alzheimer's Disease Patient Registry (ADPR) 1987-1988. Aging 1990;2:404-408.
    OpenUrl
  25. 25.↵
    McKhann G, Drachman D, Folstein M, Katzman R, Price D, Stadlan EM. Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease: report of the NINCDS-ADRDA Work Group under the auspices of Department of Health and Human Services Task Force on Alzheimer's Disease. Neurology 1984;34:939-944.
    OpenUrl
  26. 26.↵
    Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. Mini-Mental State: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975;12:189-198.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    Blessed G, Tomlinson BE, Roth M. The association between quantitative measures of dementia and of senile change in the cerebral grey matter of elderly subjects. Br J Psychiatry 1968;114:797-811.
    OpenUrl
  28. 28.↵
    Beck S, Brook RH, Lohr KN, Goldberg GA. Hearing Loss. Conceptualization and measurement of physiologic health for adults. Vol. 14. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corp, 1981:55-77.
  29. 29.↵
    Rubenstein RS. Vision impairment. Conceptualization and measurement of physiologic health for adults. Vol. 12. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corp, 1982:90-98.
  30. 30.↵
    Saunders KW, Stergachis A, Von Korff M. Group health cooperative of Puget Sound. In: Strom B, ed. Pharmacoepidemiology. 2nd ed. Chichester, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1994.
  31. 31.↵
    Bracco L, Gallato R, Grigoletto F, et al. Factors affecting course and survival in Alzheimer's disease. Arch Neurol 1994;51:1213-1219.
    OpenUrl

Letters: Rapid online correspondence

No comments have been published for this article.
Comment

REQUIREMENTS

If you are uploading a letter concerning an article:
You must have updated your disclosures within six months: http://submit.neurology.org

Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.

If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.

Submission specifications:

  • Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
  • Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
  • Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
  • Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
  • Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.

More guidelines and information on Disputes & Debates

Compose Comment

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
NOTE: The first author must also be the corresponding author of the comment.
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Publishing Agreement
NOTE: All authors, besides the first/corresponding author, must complete a separate Publishing Agreement Form and provide via email to the editorial office before comments can be posted.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

You May Also be Interested in

Back to top
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods.
    • Results.
    • Discussion.
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Disclosures
Advertisement

Hemiplegic Migraine Associated With PRRT2 Variations A Clinical and Genetic Study

Dr. Robert Shapiro and Dr. Amynah Pradhan

► Watch

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.

Alert Me

  • Alert me when eletters are published
Neurology: 100 (5)

Articles

  • Ahead of Print
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Popular Articles
  • Translations

About

  • About the Journals
  • Ethics Policies
  • Editors & Editorial Board
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise

Submit

  • Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Information for Reviewers
  • AAN Guidelines
  • Permissions

Subscribers

  • Subscribe
  • Activate a Subscription
  • Sign up for eAlerts
  • RSS Feed
Site Logo
  • Visit neurology Template on Facebook
  • Follow neurology Template on Twitter
  • Visit Neurology on YouTube
  • Neurology
  • Neurology: Clinical Practice
  • Neurology: Education
  • Neurology: Genetics
  • Neurology: Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • AAN.com
  • AANnews
  • Continuum
  • Brain & Life
  • Neurology Today

Wolters Kluwer Logo

Neurology | Print ISSN:0028-3878
Online ISSN:1526-632X

© 2023 American Academy of Neurology

  • Privacy Policy
  • Feedback
  • Advertise