MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096572363 · doi:10.1017/s1355617710001372

Onset and Rate of Cognitive Change Before Dementia Diagnosis: Findings From Two Swedish Population-Based Longitudinal Studies

2010· article· en· W2096572363 on OpenAlexaff
Valgeir Thorvaldsson, Stuart MacDonald, Laura Fratiglioni, Bengt Winblad, Miia Kivipelto, Erika J. Laukka, Ingmar Skoog, Simona Sacuiu, Xinxin Guo, Svante Östling, Anne Börjesson‐Hanson, Deborah Gustafson, Boo Johansson, Lars Bäckman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the International Neuropsychological Society · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersUniversity of Cambridge
KeywordsCognitive declineDementiaCognitionPopulationLongitudinal studyPsychologyAudiologyDemographyMedicineInternal medicinePsychiatryDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We used data from two population-based longitudinal studies to estimate time of onset and rate of accelerated decline across cognitive domains before dementia diagnosis. The H70 includes an age-homogeneous sample (127 cases and 255 non-cases) initially assessed at age 70 with 12 follow-ups over 30 years. The Kungsholmen Project (KP) includes an age-heterogeneous sample (279 cases and 562 non-cases), with an average age of 82 years at initial assessment, and 4 follow-ups spanning 13 years. We fit mixed linear models to the data and determined placement of change points by a profile likelihood method. Results demonstrated onset of accelerated decline for fluid (speed, memory) versus crystallized (verbal, clock reading) abilities occurring approximately 10 and 5 years before diagnosis, respectively. Although decline before change points was greater for fluid abilities, acceleration was more pronounced for crystallized abilities after the change points. This suggests that onset and rate of acceleration vary systematically along the fluid-crystallized ability continuum. There is early onset in fluid abilities, but these changes are difficult to detect due to substantial age-related decline. Onset occurred later and acceleration was greater in crystallized abilities, suggesting that those markers may provide more valid identification of cases in later stages of the prodromal phase.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations47
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the International Neuropsychological SocietySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207