MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2296207861 · doi:10.2215/cjn.01960215

Frailty and Cognitive Function in Incident Hemodialysis Patients

2015· article· en· W2296207861 on OpenAlexaff
Mara McAdams‐DeMarco, Jingwen Tan, Megan L. Salter, Alden L. Gross, Lucy A. Meoni, Bernard G. Jaar, Wen-Hong Linda Kao, Rulan S. Parekh, Dorry L. Segev, Stephen M. Sozio

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute on AgingNational Center for Research ResourcesAmerican Society of Nephrology
KeywordsMedicineCohortDementiaCognitive declineInternal medicineCohort studyConfidence intervalCognitionComorbidityDepression (economics)Body mass indexGerontologyDiseasePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patients of all ages undergoing hemodialysis (HD) have a high prevalence of cognitive impairment and worse cognitive function than healthy controls, and those with dementia are at high risk of death. Frailty has been associated with poor cognitive function in older adults without kidney disease. We hypothesized that frailty might also be associated with poor cognitive function in adults of all ages undergoing HD. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: At HD initiation, 324 adults enrolled (November 2008 to July 2012) in a longitudinal cohort study (Predictors of Arrhythmic and Cardiovascular Risk in ESRD) were classified into three groups (frail, intermediately frail, and nonfrail) based on the Fried frailty phenotype. Global cognitive function (3MS) and speed/attention (Trail Making Tests A and B [TMTA and TMTB, respectively]) were assessed at cohort entry and 1-year follow-up. Associations between frailty and cognitive function (at cohort entry and 1-year follow-up) were evaluated in adjusted (for sex, age, race, body mass index, education, depression and comorbidity at baseline) linear (3MS, TMTA) and Tobit (TMTB) regression models. RESULTS: At cohort entry, the mean age was 54.8 years (SD 13.3), 56.5% were men, and 72.8% were black. The prevalence of frailty and intermediate frailty were 34.0% and 37.7%, respectively. The mean 3MS was 89.8 (SD 7.6), TMTA was 55.4 (SD 29), and TMTB was 161 (SD 83). Frailty was independently associated with lower cognitive function at cohort entry for all three measures (3MS: -2.4 points; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], -4.2 to -0.5; P=0.01; TMTA: 12.1 seconds; 95% CI, 4.7 to 19.4; P<0.001; and TMTB: 33.2 seconds; 95% CI, 9.9 to 56.4; P=0.01; all tests for trend, P<0.001) and with worse 3MS at 1-year follow-up (-2.8 points; 95% CI, -5.4 to -0.2; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In adult incident HD patients, frailty is associated with worse cognitive function, particularly global cognitive function (3MS).

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)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations199
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Journal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207