Table 3.

Multivariable Logistic Estimates of Annual Percent Change in the Prevalence of Cognitive Limitation, Including Proxy Responses by Three Different Approaches

Sample	Approach for proxies	Years	Unweighted N	ARR	p value	Annual % change
Self-reports		1998–2014	76,968	1.075	.316	0.452
Self- and proxy reports	Approach #1	1998–2014	81,503	1.111	.142	0.658
	Approach #2	1998–2014	81,511	1.033	.629	0.203
	Approach #3	2000–2014	71,047	0.961	.549	−0.284

Note. #1—the proxy report of the person having ever been diagnosed with a memory condition, dementia, or senility. #2—the proxy assessment of the person’s memory as fair or poor, the bottom two categories on a 5-point scale. #3—the approach used by Langa and Weir (Crimmins et al., 2011) based on three variables: proxy’s assessment of memory ranging from excellent (0) to poor (4; score 0–4); number of five instrumental activities of daily living that the sample person cannot do or has difficulty doing (score 0–5); and the interviewer’s assessment of difficulty completing the interview because of the sample person’s cognitive limitations (score of 0 = none, 1 = some, and 2 = prevents completion); A summary score of 0–2 is classified as normal cognition, 3–11 as CL. ARR = adjusted risk ratio; CL = cognitive limitation.