Estimating the Lifetime Risk of Dementia in the Canadian Elderly Population Using Cross-Sectional Cohort Survival Data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dementia is one of the world's major public health challenges. The lifetime risk of dementia is the proportion of individuals who ever develop dementia during their lifetime. Despite its importance to epidemiologists and policy-makers, this measure does not seem to have been estimated in the Canadian population. Data from a birth cohort study of dementia are not available. Instead, we must rely on data from the Canadian Study of Heath and Aging, a large cross-sectional study of dementia with follow-up for survival. These data present challenges because they include substantial loss to follow-up and are not representatively drawn from the target population because of structural sampling biases. A first bias is imparted by the cross-sectional sampling scheme, while a second bias is a result of stratified sampling. Estimation of the lifetime risk and related quantities in the presence of these biases has not been previously addressed in the literature. We develop and study nonparametric estimators of the lifetime risk, the remaining lifetime risk and cumulative risk at specific ages, accounting for these complexities. In particular, we reveal the fact that estimation of the lifetime risk is invariant to stratification by current age at sampling. We present simulation results validating our methodology, and provide novel facts about the epidemiology of dementia in Canada using data from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging.
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.
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 | 0.006 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 it