A Cognitive Turning Point in Development of Clinical Alzheimer’s Disease Dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Biracial Population Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cognitive changes during the preclinical phase of Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia have been characterized among European Americans (EAs), but studies of preclinical changes among African Americans (AAs) are notably absent. Methods: Preclinical changes in cognition before the development of AD dementia and mild cognitive impairment over a period of 18 years were examined using change points in a biracial sample of 2,125 older adults. Results: Of 2,125 participants, 442 (21%) developed AD dementia and 661 (31%) developed mild cognitive impairment. A cognitive change point occurred between 4 and 5 years before the clinical diagnosis of AD dementia. Differences between AAs and EAs were observed: EAs had a higher starting level of composite cognitive function, and a change point occurred 4.3 years before AD dementia among AAs and 4.7 years among EAs. The slope of cognitive decline after the change point among those developing clinical AD dementia was significantly greater among EAs (0.233 units/y) than among AAs (0.171 units/y; p < .001). This difference in slope of cognitive decline persisted after diagnosis of AD dementia so that at the conclusion of observation the difference in average cognitive level was reversed. AAs without cognitive impairment had a lower average baseline of cognition than EAs, but the slopes of cognitive decline were similar. Conclusions: A prominent change to a steeper slope of cognitive decline occurs between 4 and 5 years prior to the diagnosis of AD dementia. The slope of cognitive decline after the change point is steeper among EAs than AAs.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".