MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162648764 · doi:10.1093/gerona/glt103

APOE Genotype and Cognitive Change in Young, Middle-Aged, and Older Adults Living in the Community

2013· article· en· W2162648764 on OpenAlexfundno aff
David Bunce, Allison A. M. Bielak, Kaarin J. Anstey, Nicolas Cherbuin, Philip J. Batterham, Simon Easteal

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journals of Gerontology Series A · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchLeverhulme Trust
KeywordsApolipoprotein ECognitive declineCognitionDementiaNeuropathologyAllelePleiotropyGerontologyGenotypePsychologyYoung adultEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceDevelopmental psychologyMedicineGeneticsBiologyPsychiatryDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined whether the apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 allele was associated with cognitive benefits in young adulthood and whether it reversed to confer cognitive deficits in later life ("antagonistic pleiotropy") in the absence of dementia-related neuropathology. We also tested whether the ε2 allele was associated with disadvantages in early adulthood but offered protection against cognitive decline in early old age. Eight-year cognitive change was assessed in 2,013 cognitively normal community-dwelling adults aged 20-24, 40-44, or 60-64 years at baseline. Although cognitive decline was associated with age, multilevel models contrasting the ε2 and ε4 alleles provided no evidence that the APOE genotype was related to cognitive change in any of the age groups. The findings suggest that in the absence of clinically salient dementia pathology, APOE ε2 and ε4 alleles do not exhibit antagonistic pleiotropy in relation to cognition between the ages of 20 and 72 years.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations65
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journals of Gerontology Series ASame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207