MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205993144 · doi:10.1002/alz.054022

The PRagmatic EValuation of evENTs And Benefits of Lipid‐lowering in oldEr adults (PREVENTABLE) trial: Study design and procedures for cognitive assessment and adjudication

2021· article· en· W4205993144 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bonnie C. Sachs, Stephen R. Rapp, Christine E. Kistler, Nicolas Musi, Mark A. Supiano, Nicholas M. Pajewski, Kathryn E. Callahan, Karen P. Alexander, Raj C. Shah, Heather M. Snyder, María C. Carrillo, Sara Espinoza, Jeff D. Williamson

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaCognitionMedicineRandomized controlled trialMontreal Cognitive AssessmentObservational studyMoodGerontologyCognitive declineCognitive testClinical trialPhysical therapyPsychologyPsychiatryDiseaseCognitive impairmentInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background No existing therapies for Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias fundamentally alter the trajectory of the disease. While observational data suggests statins may reduce cognitive and functional decline in older adults, randomized evidence is lacking. Method The PRagmatic EValuation of evENTs And Benefits of Lipid‐lowering in oldEr adults (PREVENTABLE) trial is funded by the National Institute on Aging, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, and supported by the Alzheimer’s Association. The trial will test the primary hypothesis that randomization to atorvastatin 40 mg versus placebo results in superior survival free of incident dementia or persistent physical disability over 5 years. The development of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is a secondary endpoint. The target sample size is 20,000 participants ≥75 years without dementia recruited from 90 sites across the US from the National Patient‐Centered Clinical Research Network and the Veterans Affairs system. The trial will use a pragmatic, standardized telephone‐based cognitive battery, centrally administered annually, which includes a cognitive screener, the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status‐modified (TICSm). Based on TICSm scoring, an extended phone cognitive battery will be performed that includes measures of attention/executive function, verbal memory, language, and mood. In addition, the Functional Activities Questionnaire will be administered to a trusted contact. A telephone assessment of physical and functional status will also be administered annually. Cognitive and functional data will be adjudicated by a panel of experts, blinded to treatment assignment, to determine the occurrence of MCI (and subtype) or probable dementia. Result PREVENTABLE will utilize pragmatic data sources (electronic health records and administrative claims) to obtain relevant medical data; however, these mechanisms are unreliable at identifying incident dementia and MCI. The pandemic required modification of cognitive testing, embracing a purely telephonic approach at baseline, which will nonetheless permit cognitive adjudication of participants. Recruitment will be ongoing through April 2023 with results available in 2026. Conclusion PREVENTABLE represents the largest randomized pragmatic trial examining cognitive outcomes associated with statin use in older adults. Launching during the pandemic required adaptation to remote assessment, which will facilitate progress towards efficient and novel methods for pragmatic clinical trials aimed at preventing 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 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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207