Peter Fusdahl ^1,2* Miguel Germán Borda ^3,4,5 Jonathan Patricio Baldera ¹ Dag Aarsland ^1,6 Ara Khachaturian ^10,7,8,9 Geir Sverre Braut ^11,12

• ¹ Centre for Age-Related Medicine (SESAM), Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway
• ² Faculty of Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Hordaland, Norway
• ³ Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway
• ⁴ Semillero de Neurociencias y Envejecimiento, Ageing Institute, Medical School, Pontifical Javeriana University, Bogotá, Cundinamarca, Colombia
• ⁵ Division of Clinical Geriatrics, Center for Alzheimer Research, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet (KI), Solna, Stockholm, Sweden
• ⁶ Department of Old Age Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom
• ⁷ Campaign to Prevent Alzheimer’s Disease, Potomac, Maryland, United States
• ⁸ Brain Watch Coalition of the Campaign to Prevent Alzheimer’s Disease, Potomac, Maryland, United States
• ⁹ International Neurodegenerative Disease Research Center, International Neurodegenerative Disorders Research Center, Prague, Czechia
• ¹⁰ National Supercomputing Institute & Dedicated Research Network, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
• ¹¹ Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Hordaland, Norway
• ¹² Department of Research, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway

INTRODUCTION: Society commonly believes that research knowledge is complementary to public decision-making. This study aims to understand the perspectives and implications of dementia researchers communicating with policymakers and public research decision-makers (public officials). METHODS: This study uses 24 questions from an anonymous, online survey, which was received by 392 members of nine European, Latin-American and US medical researcher associations/networks in the fields of age-related neurological degeneration and dementia medicine. The data were analyzed via crosstab analysis, two group comparison analyses and a logistic regression model. RESULTS: 91 (23.2%) respondents completed the questionnaire. Eight independent variables were related to researchers' research discipline, research remuneration, experience, authorship, H-index and research grants. The statistically significant variables determining whether the respondents had contact with public officials were "Years of research experience" (p=0.004), "Number of articles first-authored in the last 5 years" (p=0.007), and "Average H-index in the last 5 years" (p=0.048) (median(IQR)). 47% of the surveyed researchers had been in contact with public officials in the last 12 months. The most frequently communicated topics were the importance of their own research to society (61%) and their own funding (60%). 87% (n=79) of the researchers did not believe that public officials had a very good understanding of their dementia research. CONCLUSION: Less than half (47%) of dementia researchers communicate with public officials, and they communicate mostly about the importance of their own research and funding their own research. nine of ten researchers do not believe that public officials understand their research well.