MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990875294 · doi:10.1177/1533317508317351

Neuropsychiatric Impairments as Predictors of Mild Cognitive Impairment, Dementia, and Alzheimer's Disease

2008· article· en· W1990875294 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Janet A. Stepaniuk, Lesley Ritchie, Holly Tuokko

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Alzheimer s Disease & Other Dementias® · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersHealth CanadaAlzheimer Society Research ProgramCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlzheimer SocietyMedical Research CouncilPfizer CanadaUniversity of OttawaPfizer
KeywordsDementiaDepression (economics)MoodCognitionPsychologyCognitive impairmentPsychiatryDiseaseAlzheimer's diseaseClinical psychologyPersonalityCognitive declineMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the relations between cognitive status and neuropsychiatric impairments in nondemented older adults in cross section and over time is examined. Using data from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA), a longitudinal, nation-wide study in which data were collected 3 times (ie, CSHA-1, CSHA-2, CSHA-3) at 5-year intervals, individuals were classified with (n = 240) and without (n = 386) cognitive impairment at CSHA-2. Loss of interest, changes in personality and mood, and depression were reported by a knowledgeable informant (ie, family or friends) more frequently for those with cognitive impairment than for those without cognitive impairment. After controlling for initial cognitive status, loss of interest and depression contributed significantly to the prediction of mild cognitive impairment, dementia, and Alzheimer's disease over time. These findings suggest that these neuropsychiatric impairments play significant roles throughout the course of cognitive decline and should be taken into consideration even before cognitive impairment is evident.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations37
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Alzheimer s Disease & Other Dementias®Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207