{"page":"https://casescribe.ai/explorer/conditions/dementia","generated_at":"2026-10-03T18:29:29.649Z","data_as_of":{"decisions":944125,"first_year":2017,"last_year":2026,"latest_decision":"2026-04-30","cfr":"2026-10-01","m21":"2026-09-29"},"about":{"publisher":"CaseScribe AI (VA Law Explorer)","source":"Public Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions (appeals of VA decisions, not VA's first decisions), M21-1 Adjudication Procedures Manual, 38 CFR Parts 3 and 4.","method":"Outcomes are issue-level: each condition the Board decided in a decision counts once. Decision data is extracted by AI and can contain errors. Rates describe past appeals and do not predict any claim.","disclaimer":"For research only. CaseScribe AI is not a law firm and this is not legal advice. Verify figures against the source decisions and regulations.","attribution":"Cite as: VA Law Explorer, CaseScribe AI, with the page URL."},"data":{"condition":"Dementia","all_conditions_granted_pct":19.4,"decisions":1374,"years":"2017-2026","granted_pct":16.4,"denied_pct":28,"remanded_pct":53.3,"granted_on_merits_pct":36.9,"by_year":[{"year":2017,"issues":115,"granted_pct":9.6,"denied_pct":30.4,"remanded_pct":51.3},{"year":2018,"issues":184,"granted_pct":10.9,"denied_pct":31.5,"remanded_pct":54.9},{"year":2019,"issues":219,"granted_pct":9.1,"denied_pct":31.1,"remanded_pct":56.2},{"year":2020,"issues":125,"granted_pct":12,"denied_pct":28.8,"remanded_pct":57.6},{"year":2021,"issues":149,"granted_pct":12.1,"denied_pct":30.2,"remanded_pct":55.7},{"year":2022,"issues":133,"granted_pct":20.3,"denied_pct":27.8,"remanded_pct":50.4},{"year":2023,"issues":154,"granted_pct":16.2,"denied_pct":27.9,"remanded_pct":55.2},{"year":2024,"issues":133,"granted_pct":26.3,"denied_pct":21.1,"remanded_pct":51.1},{"year":2025,"issues":110,"granted_pct":31.8,"denied_pct":20.9,"remanded_pct":47.3},{"year":2026,"issues":70,"granted_pct":30,"denied_pct":21.4,"remanded_pct":45.7}],"benefit_of_doubt_in_grants_pct":72,"evidence_on_merits":[{"evidence":"va_exam_favorable","decisions_with":177,"granted_pct_with":81.6,"granted_pct_without":26.6},{"evidence":"va_exam_unfavorable","decisions_with":864,"granted_pct_with":33.8,"granted_pct_without":43.9},{"evidence":"nexus_positive","decisions_with":275,"granted_pct_with":77.6,"granted_pct_without":18.2},{"evidence":"nexus_negative","decisions_with":645,"granted_pct_with":32.1,"granted_pct_without":42.5},{"evidence":"private_opinion","decisions_with":442,"granted_pct_with":53.5,"granted_pct_without":24.7},{"evidence":"treating_physician","decisions_with":88,"granted_pct_with":75,"granted_pct_without":33.3},{"evidence":"lay_statement","decisions_with":995,"granted_pct_with":31.2,"granted_pct_without":56.1},{"evidence":"buddy_statement","decisions_with":45,"granted_pct_with":42.9,"granted_pct_without":36.7},{"evidence":"combat_service","decisions_with":105,"granted_pct_with":47.2,"granted_pct_without":35.9}],"top_reasons":{"granted":[{"reason":"current diagnosis established","decisions":33},{"reason":"caused by the service-connected disability","decisions":21},{"reason":"service connection established","decisions":9},{"reason":"aggravated by the service-connected disability","decisions":6},{"reason":"favorable va medical opinion","decisions":2},{"reason":"va examiner opinions found inadequate","decisions":2}],"denied":[{"reason":"preponderance of the evidence against the claim","decisions":45},{"reason":"no current diagnosis","decisions":45},{"reason":"no in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis","decisions":39},{"reason":"service records negative or silent","decisions":32},{"reason":"current diagnosis established","decisions":23},{"reason":"va examiner: less likely than not related to service","decisions":21}]},"recent_examples":{"granted":[{"case_id":"A26038358","year":2026,"judge":"L. B. CRYAN","rationale":"Evidence is at least approximately evenly balanced regarding secondary nexus.; Reasonable doubt resolved in Veteran's favor.; Concurrence between VA neurologist and private physician with September 2017 VA psychologist opinion."},{"case_id":"A26037052","year":2026,"judge":"MARJORIE A. AUER","rationale":"Aggravated by service-connected bilateral hearing loss; Supported by multiple VA and private medical opinions; Medical literature shows link between hearing loss and dementia risk"},{"case_id":"26004098","year":2026,"judge":"JONATHAN HAGER","rationale":"Current disability established (dementia prior to death); Service-connected diabetes and CAD established; Private examiner provided positive opinion linking dementia to diabetes and CAD; Evidence evenly balanced, doubt resolved in veteran's favor"}],"denied":[{"case_id":"A26037093","year":2026,"judge":"GAYLE STROMMEN","rationale":"No competent medical or lay evidence of nexus; Veteran not competent to determine etiology; Failure to attend VA exam thwarted development"},{"case_id":"A26030381","year":2026,"judge":"THOMAS H. O'SHAY","rationale":"Did not manifest during service; Not related to service; Criteria for service connection not met"},{"case_id":"A26027288","year":2026,"judge":"B. D. WATSON","rationale":"No evidence of in-service injury or event related to dementia; Service records and TERA memorandum did not support in-service nexus; Benefit of the doubt doctrine inapplicable as evidence weighs against claim"}]},"how_va_rates":null,"rules":[]}}