Nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drug use and the risk of cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Some observational studies have established an association between exposure to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and a decreased risk of subsequently developing Alzheimer's disease (AD). Mild cognitive impairment or cognitive impairment, not dementia (CIND) is more likely to convert to AD, and no specific preventive method is currently available. The objective of this study was to determine the association of NSAID use in 5276 cognitively normal subjects of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging, a 10-year population-based cohort study, with the incidence of CIND, AD, and all-cause dementia. METHODS: Hazard ratios were calculated from Cox proportional hazards models with age as the time scale according to three study samples including 824 cases of dementia (563 cases of AD), 630 cases of dementia (435 cases of AD), and 883 cases of CIND, respectively. Adjustments were made for gender, education, lifestyle factors, comorbid diseases, and vascular risk factors. RESULTS: Lower risks for AD and all-cause dementia were significantly associated with the use of any NSAIDs and the salicylates without barbiturates subgroup in the study sample including subjects with CIND at baseline. There was a weak association between any NSAIDs and the risk of CIND (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-1.00). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that there is an association between NSAID use and a lower incidence of AD and, to a lesser extent, of CIND.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".