MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200091252 · doi:10.1097/wad.0000000000000481

Risk Factors for Alzheimer Disease Development After Traumatic Brain Injury

2021· article· en· W4200091252 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsMontreal General HospitalMcGill UniversityInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalUniversité de MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraumatic brain injuryNeurocognitiveDementiaRisk factorDiseaseAmnesiaIncidence (geometry)Medical recordAlzheimer's disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is increasingly recognized as a major risk factor for developing neurocognitive disorders, though this association remains controversial. Determination of risk factors for post-traumatic neurodegeneration in patients with TBI is critical given the high incidence of TBI. We hypothesized that cardiovascular and metabolic comorbidities, in addition to TBI severity, are associated with the risk of post-traumatic development of Alzheimer disease dementia (ADD). A case-controlled retrospective study was conducted using medical records and medical insurance data of 5642 patients with TBI admitted to a tertiary trauma center over a 12-year period, to assess risk factors of developing ADD after TBI. Logistic regression shows that presence of post-traumatic amnesia ( P= 0.03) and chronic vascular lesions ( P= 0.04) are significantly associated with development of ADD after TBI. This innovative preliminary study is the first to explore risk factors for post-traumatic ADD. Further association studies are essential to optimize care following TBI.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.279 · 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.

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer Disease & Associated DisordersSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207