Preclinical Vascular Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Neuropsychological changes that precede a diagnosis of vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) and the differences between preclinical VCI and Alzheimer disease (AD) are not well understood. We compared the neuropsychological performances of people with incident VCI, incident AD, and no cognitive impairment (NCI) 5 years before their clinical diagnoses. METHODS: The Canadian Study of Health and Aging is a prospective, cohort study of 10,263 randomly selected persons age 65 years or older. We studied 332 individuals who had completed a battery of neuropsychological tests and were diagnosed with NCI at baseline. After 5 years, 41 were diagnosed with VCI, 25 with AD, and 266 with NCI. RESULTS: At baseline, the incident-VCI group performed worse on a wide range of neuropsychological tests compared with the NCI group. A test of abstract reasoning was selectively low in the incident-VCI group, relative to both the incident-AD and NCI groups. The incident-AD group performed worse at baseline on memory tests compared with incident-VCI and NCI groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests a preclinical phase may exist in VCI that differs from that in AD. Neuropsychological measures may aid the design of preventive strategies for VCI.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".