MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221137684 · doi:10.4088/jcp.21m14105

Prevalence, Clinical Correlates, Cognitive Trajectories, and Dementia Risk Associated With Mild Behavioral Impairment in Asians

2022· article· en· W4221137684 on OpenAlexaff
Cheuk Ni Kan, Jemellee Cano, Xuhao Zhao, Zahinoor Ismail, Christopher Chen, Xin Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Clinical Psychiatry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaClinical Dementia RatingNeuropsychologyCognitionCohortMedicineCohort studyCognitive declineInternal medicineCognitive impairmentPsychiatryPsychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Mild behavioral impairment (MBI) is characterized as later-life–emergent and persistent neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS). The symptom persistence criterion of MBI has shown to increase the signal-to-noise ratio of the syndrome, decreasing the likelihood of false-positive NPS. However, the long-term cognitive and prognostic impact of MBI remains to be evaluated against the traditional framework of NPS, especially in Asian cohorts. This study investigated the epidemiologic characteristics of MBI in a prospective clinical cohort of Singaporean elderly. Methods: A total of 304 dementia-free individuals (mean age = 72.2 years, 51.6% female) were recruited between August 2010 and October 2019. All participants underwent annual neuropsychological, neuropsychiatric, and clinical assessments for 4 consecutive years and were diagnosed as having no cognitive impairment (NCI) or cognitive impairment–no dementia (CIND). MBI was ascertained using both baseline and year-1 Neuropsychiatric Inventory assessments. Cognitive Z-scores and Clinical Dementia Rating Sum-of-Boxes (CDR-SoB) scores were calculated. Results: The prevalence of MBI was 14.5% (7.1% of NCI, 12.9% of CIND-mild, and 24.7% of CIND-moderate patients). MBI patients showed poorer cognitive function at baseline (F1,295 = 8.13 , P = .005), primarily in memory and executive function domains. MBI was associated with accelerated decline in global cognition (β = –0.15; 95% CI, −0.23 to −0.07) along with faster increase in CDR-SoB (β = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.21) as compared to individuals without symptoms or transient NPS. A total of 38.6% of MBI patients developed dementia as compared to 12.3% of non-MBI elderly (χ2 = 19.29, P < .001). MBI increased risk of incident dementia by 2.56-fold as compared to no symptoms or transient NPS, regardless of cognitive impairment. Conclusions: MBI is a neurobehavioral risk factor for dementia, representing a potential target for dementia risk modeling, preventive intervention, and disease management.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.361 · 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

Citations48
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Clinical PsychiatrySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207