Simple Neuropsychological Tests May Identify Participants in Whom Aspirin Use Is Associated With Lower Dementia Incidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that neuropsychological tests could help in identifying preclinical stages of vascular cognitive impairment, when aspirin use might be associated with lower dementia incidence. METHODS: We used data of Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA) which was a longitudinal study of Canadians older than 65 years and was done in 3 waves, 1991 to 1992 (CSHA-1), 1996 to 1997 (CSHA-2), and 2001 to 2002. RESULTS: CSHA-1 participants with vascular dementia performed worse in copying pentagons and writing subtests of modified Mini-Mental State Examination test than participants with probable Alzheimer's disease. Salicylates use was associated with lower incident dementia among normal cognition CSHA-1 participants who had low scores in copying pentagons and writing subtests after controlling for age, sex, education, and vascular risk factors (odds ratio = 0.25, 95% confidence interval: 0.073-0.86, P = .028). CONCLUSIONS: Two simple neuropsychological tests might help in identifying preclinical stages of vascular cognitive impairment, and salicylates use was associated with lower dementia incidence.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".