Abstract WMP115: The Metabolic Syndrome Components and Cognitive Decline: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Midlife obesity is associated with dementia in later life, but how the metabolic syndrome (MetS) relates to cognitive change is less understood. We hypothesized that MetS would be more predictive of 6-year cognitive decline than its individual components in a large biethnic cohort (the ARIC study) and that combinations of risk factors would further increase likelihood of change. Methods: The MetS was defined in 1987-89 on 10,687 participants with two cognitive assessments at two time points. In subjects aged 44 to 66, obesity measures included body mass index (BMI) and waist-to-hip ratio (WTHR). The main outcome measure was change in 1990-92 to 96-99 of three cognitive tests: Delayed Word Recall (DWR), Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST), and Word Fluency Test (WFT). Linear and logistic regressions were all adjusted for age, combined race-center, sex, education, smoking, drinking, coronary artery disease and prior stroke. Change was measured as the difference divided by the number of years between visits. Results: At baseline, the prevalence of MetS was 22% (mean age 54 years, 27% black, 55% female, and 28% BMI>30 kg/m2). Subjects with MetS performed in the lowest test quintile (adjusted ORs: DWR 1.3 95% CI 1.1-1.4) in 1996-99, and much of this effect size was explained by an elevated WTHR (DWR OR 1.3 CI 1.1-1.5) and diabetes (DWR OR 1.4 CI 1.2-1.7). MetS was not associated with annual cognitive change, and diabetes was the only significant component associated with change (adjusted beta: DWR 0.03 p=.01, DSST 0.2 p<.001, WFT 0.09 p=.01). Conclusion: MetS at ages 44 to 66 was associated with worse cognitive function at follow-up, but not with annual cognitive decline over several years. Elevated WTHR and diabetes explained most of the association of MetS with cognitive function measures, and diabetes with cognitive decline. Until we have a definition of the MetS more based on pathophysiology, the components of the MetS should be the focus of analysis in future studies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".