MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 16664: Aortic Valve Calcification is Prognostic for Mild Cognitive Impairment

2020· article· en· W3163716836 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hojune Chung, Jessica Chen, Jared Christensen, Dhairyasheel Ghosalkar, Cullen Soares, Alice Chu, Nishant R. Shah, Wen‐Chih Wu, Gaurav Choudhary, Alan Morrison

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineCardiologyCohortAortic valveProportional hazards modelCoronary artery diseaseRetrospective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: While an association between vascular disease and dementia has been identified, few studies have assessed the longitudinal relationship between aortic valve calcification (AVC) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). We recently found AVC to be associated with increased atherosclerotic events, and we sought to determine the prognostic value of AVC derived from low dose, lung cancer screening computed tomography (LCSCT) for MCI in a moderate-to-high atherosclerotic risk cohort. Methods: This was a single site, retrospective analysis of 1401 U.S. veterans (65 years [IQI: 61, 68] years; 97% male), who underwent quantification of AVC from LCSCT indicated for smoking history. Exclusion criteria included lung cancer, prior aortic valve replacement and prior MCI diagnosis. The primary outcome was new diagnosis of MCI identified by objective testing (Mini-Mental Status Exam or Montreal Cognitive Assessment) or by ICD coding. Secondary outcome was nonfatal cerebrovascular accident (CVA). Time-to-event analysis was carried out using AVC as a continuous and a categorical variable, and multivariate adjustment included age, diabetes mellitus, glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min, coronary artery disease, and prior CVA. Results: Over a 5-year follow up, 110 patients (8%) were newly diagnosed with MCI and 45 patients (3%) had CVA. By Cox regression, AVC was predictive of MCI (HR: 1.15 [1.07 -1.24], p<0.001) and the association remained significant after multivariate adjustment (HR: 1.09 [1.01-1.18], p=0.026). Non-zero AVC tertiles were: 0.1-115; 116-427; and ≥428 Agatston Units. AVC was associated with MCI at increasing tertiles, and after multivariate analysis, the association remained significant (HR: 1.89 [1.09-3.28], p=0.024 and HR: 1.80 [1.01-3.20], p=0.047; tertiles 2 and 3, respectively). AVC was also associated with CVA (HR: 1.17 [1.05-1.32], p=0.006); however, the association lost significance after multivariate adjustment (HR: 1.12 [0.99-1.26], p=0.080). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study demonstrating that quantification of AVC from LCSCT is predictive of MCI. The association may be in part due to atherosclerotic thromboembolic events as there was a trend toward increasing nonfatal CVA in this population.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases→French-language works237,207→