Subjective cognitive decline and rates of incident Alzheimer's disease and non–Alzheimer's disease dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In this multicenter study on subjective cognitive decline (SCD) in community-based and memory clinic settings, we assessed the (1) incidence of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and non-AD dementia and (2) determinants of progression to dementia. METHODS: Eleven cohorts provided 2978 participants with SCD and 1391 controls. We estimated dementia incidence and identified risk factors using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: In SCD, incidence of dementia was 17.7 (95% Poisson confidence interval 15.2-20.3)/1000 person-years (AD: 11.5 [9.6-13.7], non-AD: 6.1 [4.7-7.7]), compared with 14.2 (11.3-17.6) in controls (AD: 10.1 [7.7-13.0], non-AD: 4.1 [2.6-6.0]). The risk of dementia was strongly increased in SCD in a memory clinic setting but less so in a community-based setting. In addition, higher age (hazard ratio 1.1 [95% confidence interval 1.1-1.1]), lower Mini-Mental State Examination (0.7 [0.66-0.8]), and apolipoprotein E ε4 (1.8 [1.3-2.5]) increased the risk of dementia. DISCUSSION: SCD can precede both AD and non-AD dementia. Despite their younger age, individuals with SCD in a memory clinic setting have a higher risk of dementia than those in community-based cohorts.
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 | 0.008 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".