The Association Between Parkinsonism, Alzheimer's Disease, and Mortality: A Comprehensive Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The impact of parkinsonism on survival in older persons independent of dementia is not well understood. METHODS: Participants in the clinical examination of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging who had parkinsonism and were older than age 65 were identified. The impact of parkinsonism on 5-year survival was determined for a combined cohort with and without dementia, and a stratified analysis was then conducted for the subgroups with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and those without dementia. Subjects with a previous diagnosis of Parkinson's disease and those prescribed drugs causing extrapyramidal side effects were excluded. FINDINGS: A total of 721 subjects with AD and 1705 subjects without dementia were examined. After adjusting for age and residential status (community vs institution), parkinsonism was associated with poorer survival in the combined cohort (risk ratio 1.51; 95% CI, 1.22-1.85), in those with AD (risk ratio 1.34; 95% CI, 1.02-1.76), and those without dementia (risk ratio 1.54; 95% CI, 1.11-2.15). In the combined cohort, parkinsonism remained independently associated with higher mortality after adjusting for AD status (risk ratio 1.39; 95% CI, 1.13-1.72). In the subgroup with AD, parkinsonism remained associated with poorer survival after adjusting for severity of cognitive impairment (risk ratio 1.33; 95% CI. 1.04-1.74). INTERPRETATION: Parkinsonism is significantly associated with poorer survival in older persons, regardless of whether they have dementia.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".