The CAIDE Dementia Risk Score App: The development of an evidence‐based mobile application to predict the risk of dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The CAIDE (Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging, and Incidence of Dementia) Dementia Risk Score is a validated tool to predict late-life dementia risk (20 years later), based on midlife vascular risk factors. The goal was to render this prediction tool widely accessible. METHODS: The CAIDE Risk Score (mobile application) App was developed based on the CAIDE Dementia Risk Score, involving information on age, educational level, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, obesity, and physical inactivity. RESULTS: The CAIDE Risk Score App is an evidence-based practical tool, which allows users to detect their individual risk, provides guidance for risk modification, and suggests consulting a health care practitioner if needed. Moreover, it allows practitioners to discuss preventive measures and monitor risk reduction. CONCLUSIONS: The CAIDE Risk Score App is the first to predict the risk for dementia through an important evidence-based tool. The App can encourage users to actively decrease their modifiable risk factors and postpone cognitive impairment and dementia.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".