<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Anstey KJ</submitter><funding>Medical Research Council</funding><pagination>S165-S186</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC6700718</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>70(s1)</volume><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>The translation of evidence on dementia risk factors into clinical advice requires careful evaluation of the methodology and scope of data from which risk estimates are obtained.&lt;h4>Objective&lt;/h4>To evaluate the quantity, quality, and representativeness of evidence, we conducted a review of reviews of risk factors for Alzheimer's disease (AD), Vascular dementia (VaD), and Any Dementia.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>PubMed, Cochrane library, and the Global Index Medicus were searched to identify meta-analyses of observational studies of risk factors for AD, VaD, and Any Dementia. PROSPERO CRD42017053920.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Meta-analysis data were available for 34 risk factors for AD, 26 risk factors for Any Dementia and eight for VaD. Quality of evidence varied greatly in terms of the numbe</pubmed_abstract><journal>Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD</journal><pubmed_title>A Systematic Review of Meta-Analyses that Evaluate Risk Factors for Dementia to Evaluate the Quantity, Quality, and Global Representativeness of Evidence.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC6700718</pmcid><funding_grant_id>G0500997</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>MR/J50001X/1</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Peters R</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Jagger C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Anstey KJ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Eramudugolla R</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Ee N</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>A Systematic Review of Meta-Analyses that Evaluate Risk Factors for Dementia to Evaluate the Quantity, Quality, and Global Representativeness of Evidence.</name><description>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>The translation of evidence on dementia risk factors into clinical advice requires careful evaluation of the methodology and scope of data from which risk estimates are obtained.&lt;h4>Objective&lt;/h4>To evaluate the quantity, quality, and representativeness of evidence, we conducted a review of reviews of risk factors for Alzheimer's disease (AD), Vascular dementia (VaD), and Any Dementia.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>PubMed, Cochrane library, and the Global Index Medicus were searched to identify meta-analyses of observational studies of risk factors for AD, VaD, and Any Dementia. PROSPERO CRD42017053920.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Meta-analysis data were available for 34 risk factors for AD, 26 risk factors for Any Dementia and eight for VaD. Quality of evidence varied greatly in terms of the numbe</description><dates><release>2019-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2019</publication><modification>2026-05-07T08:45:17.556Z</modification><creation>2019-09-07T07:01:17Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC6700718</accession><cross_references><pubmed>31306123</pubmed><doi>10.3233/JAD-190181</doi></cross_references></HashMap>