MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016283672 · doi:10.14283/jfa.2020.21

Prediction of Cognitive Status and 5-Year Survival Rate for Elderly with Cardiovascular Diseases: A Canadian Study of Health and Aging Secondary Data Analysis

2021· article· en· W3016283672 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sarah Pakzad, Paul Bourque, Nader Fallah

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Frailty & Aging · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia HospitalUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurocognitiveMedicineDementiaGerontologyCognitionDiseaseCognitive declineCardiovascular healthPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Given the important association between cardiovascular disease and cognitive decline, and their significant implications on frailty status, the contribution of neurocognitive frailty measure helping with the assessment of patient outcomes is dearly needed. OBJECTIVES: The present study examines the prognostic value of the Neurocognitive Frailty Index (NFI) in the elderly with cardiovascular disease. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA) dataset was used for prediction of 5-year cognitive changes. SETTING: Community and institutional sample. PARTICIPANTS: Canadians aged 65 and over [Mean age: 80.4 years (SD=6.9; Range of 66-100)]. MEASUREMENT: Neurocognitive Frailty Index (NFI) and Modified Mini-Mental State (3MS) scores for cognitive functioning of all subjects at follow-up and mortality rate were measured. RESULTS: The NFI mean score was 9.63 (SD = 6.04) and ranged from 0 to 33. This study demonstrated that the NFI was significantly associated with cognitive changes for subjects with heart disease and this correlation was a stronger predictor than age. CONCLUSION: The clinical relevance of this study is that our result supports the prognostic utility of the NFI tool in treatment planning for those with modifiable cardiovascular disease risk factors in the development of dementia.

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 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)0.002
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 score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Frailty & AgingSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207