MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3144704446 · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-86397-7

Association of sex differences in dementia risk factors with sex differences in memory decline in a population-based cohort spanning 20–76 years

2021· article· en· W3144704446 on OpenAlexafffund
Kaarin J. Anstey, Ruth Peters, Moyra E. Mortby, Kim M. Kiely, Ranmalee Eramudugolla, Nicolas Cherbuin, Md Hamidul Huque, Roger A. Dixon

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta InnovatesDementia Collaborative Research Centres, AustraliaDementia Centre for Research CollaborationAustralian Research CouncilConsortium canadien en neurodégénérescence associée au vieillissement
KeywordsCognitive declineDementiaGerontologyDemographyPopulationDepression (economics)MedicineVascular dementiaCohortStroke (engine)Cohort studyPsychologyInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sex differences in late-life memory decline may be explained by sex differences in dementia risk factors. Episodic memory and dementia risk factors were assessed in young, middle-aged and older adults over 12 years in a population-based sample (N = 7485). For men in midlife and old age, physical, cognitive and social activities were associated with less memory decline, and financial hardship was associated with more. APOE e4 and vascular risk factors were associated with memory decline for women in midlife. Depression, cognitive and physical activity were associated with memory change in older women. Incident midlife hypertension (β = - 0.48, 95% CI - 0.87, - 0.09, p = 0.02) was associated with greater memory decline in women and incident late-life stroke accounted for greater memory decline in men (β = - 0.56, 95% CI - 1.12, - 0.01), p = 0.05). Women have fewer modifiable risk factors than men. Stroke and hypertension explained sex differences in memory decline for men and women respectively.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations129
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207