MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1989154250 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2012.05.1357

P3‐137: Does the length of time between traumatic brain injury and the onset of Alzheimer's disease affect the rate of cognitive and functional progression?: The Cache County Dementia Progression Study

2012· article· en· W1989154250 on OpenAlexaff
Mac Gilbert, Kyle Hess, Chris Corcoran, Christine Snyder, Maria C. Norton, Vani Rao, Kathleen A. Welsh‐Bohmer, John C.S. Breitner, Constantine G. Lyketsos, JoAnn T. Tschanz

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaTraumatic brain injuryClinical Dementia RatingPopulationPsychologyNeuropsychologyMedicineCognitionDiseasePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

History of traumatic brain injury (TBI) has been associated with an increased risk of Alzheimer's Disease (AD) and, in animal studies, increased amyloid deposition. However, the effects of TBI on dementia progression have not been examined. We studied this issue in a population-based sample of persons with AD, and whether recency of TBI in relation to dementia onset affected the rate of cognitive and functional decline in AD. 325 individuals with incident AD (65% female) were examined at intervals between 0.5–2 years, for a maximum of 11.18 years (mdn=1.54). Mean (sd) age of dementia onset and duration at diagnosis were 84.4 (6.4) and 1.7 (1.4) years, respectively. Cognition was assessed with a neuropsychological test battery that included measures of episodic and semantic memory, verbal fluency, constructional praxis and executive functions. Functional ability was assessed with the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale sum of boxes (CDR-sb). Lifetime history of TBI, ascertained before the onset of dementia by the subject, and updated thereafter by a caregiver was categorized as: no TBI, history of TBI less than or equal to 10 years before dementia onset (TBI LTE 10), and history of TBI greater than 10 years before onset (TBI GT 10). Linear mixed models were fitted for each outcome. Covariates tested in all models included APOE genotype, and demographic factors. 8.9% of participants were categorized as TBI LTE 10, and 19.7% as TBI GT 10. Only those in the TBI LTE 10 group declined faster on the CDR-sb (P=0.02) and on average, had lower scores on semantic memory (P=0.01) compared to those without a history of TBI. Those categorized as TBI GT 10 on average, had higher scores on list learning and recognition memory (P < 0.02). History of TBI did not predict rate of cognitive decline.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→