MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092507047 · doi:10.1111/jgs.16834

Association Between Exposure to General Versus Regional Anesthesia and Risk of Dementia in Older Adults

2020· article· en· W3092507047 on OpenAlexaffabout
Clive Velkers, Miles Berger, Sudeep S. Gill, Roderic G. Eckenhoff, Heather Stuart, Marlo Whitehead, Peter C. Austin, Paula A. Rochon, Dallas Seitz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteQueen's UniversityWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity of CalgaryInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesKingston Health Sciences Centre
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsMedicineDementiaHazard ratioPropensity score matchingCohortConfidence intervalCohort studyRetrospective cohort studyConfoundingPopulationRelative riskSubgroup analysisGerontologyDiseaseSurgeryInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Cognitive changes are commonly observed in older adults following surgical procedures. There are concerns that exposure to general anesthesia (GA) may contribute to an increased risk of Alzheimer's disease. Our study examined the associations between exposure to GA compared with regional anesthesia (RA) administered for elective surgical procedures and the development of dementia. DESIGN: Population-based propensity matched retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Linked administrative databases were accessed from ICES (formerly called the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Services) in Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: We included all community-dwelling individuals aged 66 and older who underwent one of five elective surgical procedures in Ontario, Canada, between April 1, 2007, and March 31, 2011. Individuals with evidence of dementia preceding cohort entry were excluded. Individuals who received GA were matched within surgical procedures to those who received RA on age, sex, cohort entry year, and a propensity score to control for potential confounders. MEASUREMENTS: The baseline characteristics of the study sample were compared before and after matching. Individuals were followed for up to 5 years following cohort entry for the occurrence of dementia using a validated algorithm. Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to determine the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the association between anesthetic type and dementia. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were undertaken. RESULTS: A total of 7,499 matched pairs were included in the final analysis. Overall, no difference was observed in the risk of being diagnosed with dementia for individuals who received GA when compared with RA (HR = 1.0; 95% CI = .8-1.2). There was also no association between anesthesia and dementia in most subgroup and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Elective surgery using GA was not associated with an overall elevated risk of dementia when compared with RA. Future studies are required to determine whether surgery is a risk factor for dementia irrespective of anesthetic technique.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations23
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Geriatrics SocietySame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207