Skip to main content
. 2022 Sep 14;14(1):e12357. doi: 10.1002/dad2.12357

TABLE 2.

Effect of AWV use on detection of cognitive impairment or dementia

Age‐adjusted difference Model 1 (OLS) Model 2 (IV, 2SLS)
Estimate (95% CI) p‐value 1st stage (95% CI) F‐statistic 2nd Stage (95% CI) p‐value
All −1.28 −0.79 (−0.87, −0.76) <0.001 1.22 (1.21, 1.23) 17,410 0.47 (0.14,0.80) 0.005
White −1.38 −0.82 (−0.85, −0.80) <0.001 1.24 (1.23, 1.25) 19,206 0.40 (0.05, 0.75) 0.024
Black −0.91 −0.83 (−0.96, −0.71) <0.001 0.90 (0.87, 0.94) 1,253 2.00 (0.05, 3.95) 0.044
Hispanic 0.13 −0.29 (−0.41, −0.15) <0.001 1.20 (1.16, 1.24) 827 0.37 (−1.40, 2.13) 0.684
Asian/PI −0.37 −0.37 (−0.52, −0.23) <0.001 1.17 (1.06, 1.25) 298 −0.28 (−3.50, 2.94) 0.864

Notes: N (full sample) = 9,911,237; model 1 and 2 estimates multiplied by 100 to reflect percentage points; AWV instrumented with county‐level change in AWV. Model 1 and 2 adjusted for age, low‐income subsidy, dual enrollment status, comorbidities, and zip‐code level percent high school grads and median income; robust standard errors clustered on the beneficiary.

Abbreviation: PI, Pacific Islanders.