Determinants and Detection of Low Body Mass Index in Community-Dwelling Adults With Alzheimer's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the proportion of older adults with Alzheimer's disease presenting to a geriatric clinic with low body mass index (BMI), the proportion of these individuals recognized by clinicians as malnourished, and what patients' characteristics and caregivers' and clinicians' impressions are associated with low BMI. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: An outpatient geriatric clinic located in a university-affiliated teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: 340 patients with Alzheimer's disease, average age 75 years. MEASUREMENTS: Individuals with a BMI below 21 were considered at risk of malnutrition. Physical examination and medical information were obtained from patients and caregivers by clinicians using a standardized assessment protocol. Clinicians' impression regarding evidence of malnutrition was obtained. RESULTS: Forty-six patients (16%) had a BMI below 21. Clinicians reported evidence of potential malnutrition in 11 patients, 8 of whom had a BMI below 21. Using logistic regression, we found that women were five times more likely to have a BMI below 21 than men, and that individuals with low cognition were twice as likely to have a BMI below 21 than individuals with higher cognition. CONCLUSION: The proportion of patients with Alzheimer's disease with a BMI below 21 is similar to that encountered in the general population aged 65+. However, clinicians have difficulty identifying persons at risk of malnutrition according to BMI status. Women with low cognition were at increased risk of having a low BMI. Improvement in the detection of malnutrition is desirable. Further exploration of causal links between cognition and malnutrition is required.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".