MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113642314 · doi:10.1017/s1041610203008949

Mixed Dementia: Alzheimer’s Cerebrovascular Disease

2003· article· en· W2113642314 on OpenAlexaff
Kenneth Rockwood

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Psychogeriatrics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaMedicineDiseaseAlzheimer's diseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"Mixed dementia" is traditionally defined as Alzheimer's disease with cerebrovascular disease (CVD). Because the risks of both neurodegenerative dementias and cerebrovascular disease increase with age, the mixed dementias are likely the most common. In practice, patients with mixed dementia are diagnosed by one of two routes: Either they have evidence of a neurodegenerative dementia and CVD at the outset, or, they have a classical neurodegenerative presentation but are found to have ischemic lesions by neuroimaging. These facts have implications for the development of evidence-based diagnostic criteria.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.004

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations25
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational PsychogeriatricsSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207