Diabetes mellitus and the Risk of Dementia, Alzheimer’s Disease and Vascular Cognitive Impairment in the Canadian Study of Health and Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Conflicting results have been reported about the status of diabetes mellitus as a risk for Alzheimer's disease. We investigated the relationship between diabetes and incident dementia (including Alzheimer's disease and vascular cognitive impairment) in a 5-year longitudinal study. METHODS: Secondary analysis of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging, a representative cohort study of dementia in older Canadians. RESULTS: 5,574 subjects without cognitive impairment at baseline participated in 5-year follow-up. Diabetes mellitus at baseline was associated with incident vascular cognitive impairment (RR: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.12-2.33) and its subtypes, vascular dementia (RR: 2.03; 95% CI: 1.15-3.57), and vascular cognitive impairment not dementia (RR: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.01-2.78). Diabetes was not associated with mixed Alzheimer's/vascular dementia (RR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.34-2.21), incident Alzheimer's disease (RR: 1.30; 95% CI: 0.83-2.03) or all dementias (RR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.90-1.76). CONCLUSIONS: Despite increased recognition of the role of vascular factors in Alzheimer's disease, we did not find an association between diabetes and incident Alzheimer's disease, even though diabetes was associated with incident vascular cognitive impairment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".