FindArticles FindArticles
  • News
  • Technology
  • Business
  • Entertainment
  • Science & Health
  • Knowledge Base
FindArticlesFindArticles
Font ResizerAa
Search
  • News
  • Technology
  • Business
  • Entertainment
  • Science & Health
  • Knowledge Base
Follow US
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Write For Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
FindArticles © 2025. All Rights Reserved.
FindArticles > News > Science & Health

Shingrix Study Links Vaccination to Fewer Dementia Diagnoses

Pam Belluck
Last updated: August 26, 2026 12:59 pm
By Pam Belluck
Science & Health
8 Min Read
SHARE

Older adults who received the recombinant shingles vaccine Shingrix after a stay in a skilled nursing facility had fewer recorded dementia diagnoses over four years than comparable unvaccinated adults in a large U.S. analysis. The result adds evidence to a growing, but still unsettled, line of research linking shingles vaccination with dementia outcomes.

The study, described by Brown University and published in Annals of Internal Medicine, examined 509,926 Medicare beneficiaries age 66 and older who entered more than 5,500 skilled nursing facilities from 2017 through 2022. It found an adjusted 24% lower risk of a dementia diagnosis among people who received at least one dose of recombinant zoster vaccine, the vaccine sold as Shingrix. Because vaccination was not randomly assigned, however, the findings show an association, not proof that the vaccine prevents dementia.

Table of Contents
  • What the study found
  • Why diagnosis data leave uncertainty
  • How it fits with earlier vaccine research
  • No change to the vaccine’s purpose
An older adult in a clinic waiting area with a nurse and subtle neural-network imagery.

That caution is especially important because the vaccinated group was small: 8,843 people, or about 1.7% of the full study population. The researchers reported that vaccine recipients tended to be younger and healthier before vaccination than people who did not receive it. Statistical adjustment can account for many documented differences, but it cannot fully correct for characteristics absent from medical records or claims data.

What the study found

All participants had no prior dementia diagnosis and were considered eligible for shingles vaccination. Researchers linked Medicare claims with electronic health records and followed people for four years after the study’s defined starting point. By the end of follow-up, 18.8% of vaccinated participants and 24.6% of unvaccinated participants had a recorded dementia diagnosis.

The difference between those reported proportions is 5.8 percentage points. Put another way, the unadjusted figures show roughly 58 fewer diagnoses per 1,000 people in the vaccinated group over four years. The headline 24% figure is different: it is the study’s adjusted relative-risk estimate, not a 24-percentage-point decline in dementia diagnoses.

Kaley Hayes, a Brown University School of Public Health researcher who led the work, said the observed difference was roughly equivalent to one fewer dementia diagnosis for every 17 people vaccinated. That calculation describes the gap seen between the study groups; it should not be read as an established number of cases the vaccine would prevent in routine care.

A conceptual illustration of vaccinated and unvaccinated older-adult groups followed over time for recorded dementia diagnoses.
The analysis compared recorded dementia diagnoses over four years among vaccinated and unvaccinated older adults; it was not a randomized trial.

The analysis used an approach called target-trial emulation. Rather than simply comparing anyone vaccinated with anyone unvaccinated, researchers specify rules intended to mimic parts of a hypothetical randomized trial: who would be eligible, when follow-up would begin, what counted as vaccination and what outcome would be measured. It can make observational evidence more rigorous than a conventional retrospective comparison, but it does not create the balance achieved when participants are randomly assigned to receive a vaccine or a placebo.

Why diagnosis data leave uncertainty

The outcome was a recorded dementia diagnosis, not a uniform research assessment of cognition performed on every participant. Claims and health-record data are valuable for studying large populations over years, but diagnoses can be affected by when a person is evaluated, which clinicians they see, their access to follow-up care and how thoroughly symptoms are documented.

People who are vaccinated may also differ from those who are not in ways related to health care use, family support, preventive care or frailty. The study adjusted for measured factors, and its setting offers a defined point at which to compare patients entering skilled nursing care. Still, differences that were unmeasured or imperfectly recorded could help explain some or all of the association.

The population also limits how broadly the findings can be applied. Participants were older adults who had recently entered skilled nursing facilities, a medically vulnerable group with health experiences that may not resemble those of all Americans eligible for Shingrix. The available description does not establish whether completing the usual two-dose vaccine series has a different association from receiving one dose, because the exposure was defined as at least one dose.

Nor does the research identify a biological mechanism. Shingles is caused by reactivation of varicella-zoster virus, and scientists have proposed several possible pathways by which infections, inflammation or immune responses could be connected to later neurological disease. Those hypotheses do not establish that vaccination changes the processes that lead to dementia.

How it fits with earlier vaccine research

Several previous studies have reported lower dementia rates after shingles vaccination, but they have not all studied the same vaccine or used the same design. That distinction is relevant because Shingrix is a recombinant vaccine and is now the only shingles vaccine marketed in the United States; much earlier research involved the older live zoster vaccine, which is no longer used in the country.

A separate U.S. observational analysis published in 2024 and available through PubMed Central compared recipients of recombinant and live shingles vaccines. It reported an association between recombinant vaccination and lower dementia risk, offering context for the new nursing-facility analysis but not independent confirmation of its precise 24% estimate.

Research in Wales took a different approach. A 2025 report from Stanford Medicine described a study that used an age-based eligibility cutoff for the older live vaccine, effectively comparing people born just before and after a date that determined eligibility. That quasi-experimental design was intended to reduce some of the selection differences that complicate ordinary vaccine comparisons, and it too found fewer dementia diagnoses among people eligible for vaccination.

Together, the studies make the question more compelling, but they do not settle it. Different vaccines, patient populations, health systems and methods can produce results that are not directly interchangeable. A randomized clinical trial designed to measure dementia outcomes would be needed to determine whether Shingrix itself reduces dementia incidence.

No change to the vaccine’s purpose

Shingrix is recommended to prevent shingles and related complications, not as a dementia-prevention treatment. The new findings do not change that indication or provide a reason for patients to use vaccination as a substitute for evaluation of memory symptoms or for established preventive care.

Brown University said the study authors disclosed funding from GlaxoSmithKline, the manufacturer of Shingrix. The authors said the company had no role in the study design, analysis or decision to publish. The university’s original announcement was published June 15, 2026; a later version carried by ScienceDaily does not alter the underlying study description.

Pam Belluck
ByPam Belluck
Pam Belluck is a seasoned health and science journalist whose work explores the impact of medicine, policy, and innovation on individuals and society. She has reported extensively on topics like reproductive health, long-term illness, brain science, and public health, with a focus on both complex medical developments and human-centered narratives. Her writing bridges investigative depth with accessible storytelling, often covering issues at the intersection of science, ethics, and personal experience. Pam continues to examine the evolving challenges in health and medicine across global and local contexts.
Follow Us on Google News
Latest News
What Information Is Included in a Police Accident Report?
Shingrix Linked to Lower Cardiovascular Risk Than Zostavax
NFLBite Explained: The Fan-Favorite Platform for Live NFL Streams
Strategic Career Management: A Complete Guide to Navigating the Modern Job Market
AI Photo to Video Generator: How AI Is Changing the Way We Experience Images
Essential Features to Look for in Linux VPS Hosting
FDA Authorizes Abbott’s Libre Duo 10 Day Sensor
Curry Barker’s Obsession Passes $500 Million Worldwide
Shonda Rhimes Reportedly Renews Netflix Deal for Five Years
I Run a Link Building Agency. Here Are the Best Link Building Agencies of 2026
The Hidden Bottleneck Behind America’s Nursing Shortage: Why Clinical Placement Capacity, Not Classroom Seats, Is Turning Away Qualified Students
How to Choose the Right AI Tools for Your Business
FindArticles
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Write For Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Corrections Policy
  • Diversity & Inclusion Statement
  • Diversity in Our Team
  • Editorial Guidelines
  • Feedback & Editorial Contact Policy
FindArticles © 2025. All Rights Reserved.