Survival of patients with incident dementia who had a pre‐existing psychiatric disorder: a population‐based 7‐year follow‐up study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Although it is widely accepted that psychiatric disorders and dementia coexist and survival data for dementia patients have been published, there is a paucity of information regarding the survival of patients with a psychiatric disorder who develop dementia. This study fills this information gap providing survival data on patients with such comorbidity and identifies mortality risk factors. METHODS: All residents of Saskatchewan, a Canadian province, diagnosed with psychiatric problems and/or dispensed a psychiatric drug in 2000 and without dementia were followed through to 31 December 2006; the development of incident dementia was noted. Median survival time (in months) and selected predictors of mortality were measured. Analyses used Cox's proportional hazard model. Incidence density of dementia for the year 2000 was also computed. RESULTS: By December 2006, 5,583 subjects with psychiatric disorders in 2000 had been diagnosed with incident dementia, and 60.65% of them died. Dementia-incidence density in this population for 2000 was 0.01 per 1000 person years at risk among those aged 18-64 years and rapidly increased to 3.13 per 1000 person years at risk among those aged 75 to 84 years. The median survival time from dementia onset to death was 32.66 months (interquartile range 31.21-34.14). Being male, later age of onset of dementia, having a lower income, and a high chronic disease score predicted shorter survival. CONCLUSIONS: The comorbidity of psychiatric disorders and dementia resulted in shorter survival compared with that reported for patients with dementia only. These findings can be used for prognosis for patients, caregivers, and service providers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".