MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2968900487 · doi:10.1002/jcsm.12476

Prevalence, incidence, and clinical impact of cognitive–motoric risk syndrome in Europe, USA, and Japan: facts and numbers update 2019

2019· article· en· W2968900487 on OpenAlex
Marcello Maggio, Fulvio Lauretani

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cachexia Sarcopenia and Muscle · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDementiaIncidence (geometry)EpidemiologyPopulationGerontologyCognitionPediatricsDemographyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychiatryInternal medicineDiseaseEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new syndrome called the 'motoric-cognitive risk' (MCR) syndrome has recently been proposed in older persons. According to this definition, the parallel impairment in muscle and brain function is more predictive for identifying subjects at risk of dementia than impairment a in single system alone. Epidemiological studies suggest that among older persons, enrolled in worldwide population-based studies, 10% are affected by this syndrome, which confers a higher risk of future disability. In detail, the prevalence of MCR in Europe is around 8.0%, 7.0% in the United States, and 6.3% in Japan. The incidence of the MCR syndrome is estimated to be 65.2 per 1000 person years in adults aged 60 years or older. Many studies reported negative outcomes of the syndrome in older persons, emphasizing its clinical impact. In particular, in almost all longitudinal studies, MCR produces a three-time increased risk of future dementia. In Europe, data from the InCHIANTI study report an increased risk of 2.74 [1.54-4.86], which is 2.49 [1.52-4.10] in the United States and 3.27 [1.55-6.90] in Japan. The studies in different continents are also consistent in showing an increased risk of all-cause mortality, which is 1.50-1.87 in the Europeans and 1.69 [1.08-2.02] for incident disability in Japan. For the identification of the MCR syndrome, different tests and procedures have been proposed, with a final 'core-battery' that includes gait speed, dual-task gait speed, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Trail Making Test A and B. The criteria used to select this core-battery were based on the best accuracy for identifying older persons at risk of negative outcomes such as dementia, falls, aging-related disabilities, and sensitivity to interventions. The selection of these tests will allow to start studies aimed to better capture older persons at higher risk of mobility and cognitive disability. By these tests, it will be possible to better evaluate the effect of treatment composing of tailored physical exercise, nutritional suggestions, and medical therapy to overturn negative effect of both cognitive and motoric frailty. This article provides an overview of the current knowledge of the MCR syndrome.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.297 · 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