MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071560888 · doi:10.1159/000067969

Rates of Cognitive Decline in Alzheimer’s Disease and Dementia with Lewy Bodies

2003· article· en· W2071560888 on OpenAlexaffabout
Edward Helmes, John V. Bowler, Harold Merskey, David G. Muñoz, Vladimir Hachinski

Bibliographic record

VenueDementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaDementia with Lewy bodiesAlzheimer's diseasePsychologyCognitive declineCognitionLewy bodyVascular dementiaDiseaseCentral nervous system diseasePsychiatryMedicineInternal medicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increased interest in types of dementia has developed as more cases are identified in aging populations. Here we compare the rates of cognitive decline over time in three groups with dementia from the University of Western Ontario Dementia Study: Alzheimer's disease (AD), dementia with Lewy bodies and a group with both AD and Lewy bodies. All diagnoses were verified by autopsy using standard diagnostic methods. Cognitive impairment was measured with the Extended Scale for Dementia (ESD). Members of each group with dementia were age and sex matched with individuals without dementia as controls. The 15 cases of AD, 7 cases with Lewy bodies and 8 cases with both conditions were all free of significant vascular disease. Linear regression was used to determine the rate of changes in ESD scores over time in months. All three control groups showed no change in cognitive status over time. As expected, all groups with dementia showed progressive cognitive impairment. Analysis of the slope parameter showed that all groups deteriorated at the same rate of approximately 2 ESD points per month. Quadratic models fit better than simple linear models in all groups. Results suggest that the final rate of cognitive decline in dementia may not necessarily reflect the underlying cause.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations28
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDementia and Geriatric Cognitive DisordersSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207