A Reevaluation of the Duration of Survival after the Onset of Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dementia shortens life expectancy; estimates of median survival after the onset of dementia have ranged from 5 to 9.3 years. Previous studies of people with existing dementia, however, may have underestimated the deleterious effects of dementia on survival by failing to consider persons with rapidly progressive illness who died before they could be included in a study (referred to as length bias). METHODS: We used data from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging to estimate survival from the onset of symptoms of dementia; the estimate was adjusted for length bias. A random sample of 10,263 subjects 65 years old or older from throughout Canada was screened for cognitive impairment. For those with dementia, we ascertained the date of onset and conducted follow-up for five years. RESULTS: We analyzed data on 821 subjects, of whom 396 had probable Alzheimer's disease, 252 had possible Alzheimer's disease, and 173 had vascular dementia. For the group as a whole, the unadjusted median survival was 6.6 years (95 percent confidence interval, 6.2 to 7.1). After adjustment for length bias, the estimated median survival was 3.3 years (95 percent confidence interval, 2.7 to 4.0). The median survival was 3.1 years for subjects with probable Alzheimer's disease, 3.5 years for subjects with possible Alzheimer's disease, and 3.3 years for subjects with vascular dementia. CONCLUSIONS: Median survival after the onset of dementia is much shorter than has previously been estimated.
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 | 0.014 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".