MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1759264844 · doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2004.52430_11.x

PESTICIDE EXPOSURE AND DEMENTIA

2004· letter· en· W1759264844 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gazala Darvesh, Gisele Wolf‐Klein, Norman Relkin, Mark Edgar

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2004
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineAgricultural and Biological Sciences
ThématiquePesticide Exposure and Toxicity
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineSittingPhysical therapy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

To The Editor: A 76-year-old Caucasian male presented with a 3-year history of progressive cognitive loss and gait disturbance. Prior medical history included hypertension and mitral valve prolapse. The patient self-reported short-term memory deficit, micrographia, and paraphasias with unintended words and reversing letters. His son confirmed that the patient had required increasing help with finances and had recent and significant diminution of his work productivity. In addition, the patient had developed physical complaints; he had difficulty fastening buttons and cuff links and getting up from sitting position, and his gait had become unsteady. At the request of his children, he stopped driving. He began isolating himself, finding it difficult to socialize because he “misinterpreted what others said.” The patient had received a bachelor's degree from Dartmouth University and had become a successful real estate developer. He was an avid gardener and, for the previous 30 years, had spent at least 8 hours every day in his poorly ventilated greenhouse. He was keen on using multiple pesticides (including Sevin or Carbaryl, Sunspray oil, Proxo180SP, Orthene, Malathion, Kelthane, Dylox, Dursban, Dithane, Diaznon, Carbamate, and Chlordane) and never protected himself with use of mask, gown, or gloves, despite written warning on the containers. Indeed, his family commented on the putrid smell of the patient's clothes at dinnertime. After dinner, the patient would return to his greenhouse and refuse to bathe when he returned home at midnight. On physical examination, at the time of admission, his vital signs were within normal limits. Heart and lung examination were unremarkable. Mini-Mental State Examination score was 25 out of 30. Motor and sensory examination was normal. He had decreased rapid alternating movements bilaterally. His gait was narrow based with no arm swing. There was marked truncal instability with retropulsion. He was found to have minimal cogwheel rigidity, bradykinesia, and a stooped posture. He underwent neuropsychological testing. The performance corresponded to age-appropriate functioning. Memory recall, measured using the Bender recall, reflected the patient's impairment of short-term memory. There was evidence of memory loss for recent events such as forgetting telephone numbers, conversations, and events of the day. On the Wechsler-Adult Intelligence Scale—Revised subtests, immediate memory span was fair, as indicated using digits forward and backwards, and he had excellent abstract thinking, as indicated using similarities and interpretation of proverbs. Repeat neuropsychological evaluation, a year later, confirmed apraxia and significant errors in frontal system tasks with high levels of intrusion and perseverations; his fluency was at borderline level. The evaluation suggested dementia, with high premorbid function and education level. Laboratory tests were within normal limits. Spinal tap was negative. Magnetic resonance imaging of the brain, performed in April 1999, showed patchy increased signal intensity in mid pons. An electroencephalogram performed in June 1999 was unremarkable. A cerebral angiogram was negative. During the course of his 5-year illness, motor symptoms progressed more rapidly than cognitive losses. He became increasingly dependent, requiring assistance in activities of daily living. After the cerebral angiogram, in 1999, he suffered a grand mal seizure. Thereafter, he became increasingly lethargic and eventually virtually catatonic. On autopsy, the brain showed innumerable demyelinating foci affecting subcortical white matter and deeper layers of cerebral cortex of unknown etiology. There was no evidence of lesions characteristic of Alzheimer or Parkinson's disease or multiple sclerosis. (Figure 1) Luxol fast blue stain showing myelin pallor and lipid-laden macrophages. There was no evidence of lesions characteristic of Alzheimer's disease. More than 1,000 chemical compounds and biological agents are used around the world as insecticides. The controversy over whether neurobehavioral effects persist after recovery from organophosphate poisoning has continued for 30 years. There have been reports of deficits in memory and abstraction on test batteries. Workers who apply organophosphates but have not truly suffered poisoning episodes have shown subclinical neurobehavioral deficits.1 Little is known about the adverse effects of pesticides on the development of cognitive dysfunction. Case control data from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging show an association between occupational exposure to pesticides and dementia.2 The only other study to investigate this relationship is the Maastricht Aging Study, which showed occupational exposure to pesticides to be related to progressive worsening of cognitive testing in cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses.3 Gait impairment preceding cognitive impairment and progressing at a faster pace supports pesticide exposure as the likely etiology for the dementia in this elderly patient. As dementing illnesses receive more attention in our aging society, it would be beneficial to increase consumer awareness of the risks of pesticide use in leisure activities such as gardening.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,245
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,662

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,012
Tête enseignante GPT0,212
Écart entre enseignants0,200 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2004
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of the American Geriatrics SocietyMême sujetPesticide Exposure and ToxicityTravaux en français237 207