MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285012797 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2022.910062

Olfactory, Auditory, and Vestibular Performance: Multisensory Impairment Is Significantly Associated With Incident Cognitive Impairment

2022· article· en· W4285012797 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jacob C. Lucas, Zack Arambula, Alexandra Arambula, Katherine Yu, Nathan Farrokhian, Linda D’Silva, Hinrich Staecker, Jennifer A. Villwock

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicOlfactory and Sensory Function Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsAudiologyDementiaCognitionMedicineCognitive impairmentVestibular systemOlfactionHearing lossOlfactory systemMontreal Cognitive AssessmentExecutive dysfunctionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyNeuroscienceInternal medicinePsychiatryNeuropsychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Dysfunction in the olfactory, auditory, and vestibular systems are commonly seen in aging and are associated with dementia. The impact of sensory loss(es) on cognition is not well understood. Our aim was to assess the relationships between performance on objective multisensory testing and quantify the impact of dysfunction on cognition. Methods Patients presenting with subjective hearing loss presenting to a tertiary care otologic/audiologic clinic were identified and underwent multisensory testing using the Affordable, Rapid Olfactory Measurement Array (AROMA), pure tone audiometric evaluations, and the Timed “Up and Go” test. Cognitive impairment (CI) was assessed via the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was also administered. Key Results 180 patients were enrolled. Thirty one percentage ( n = 57) screened positive for cognitive impairment. When evaluating single sensory impairments, we found that olfactory dysfunction, gait impairment, and sensorineural hearing loss were all statistically significantly ( p < 0.05) associated with a higher risk of cognitive impairment (ORs 3.89, 3.49, and 2.78, respectively) for CI. Multisensory impairment was significantly associated with cognitive impairment. Subjects with dysfunction in all domains were at the highest risk for cognitive impairment (OR 15.7, p < 0.001) vs. those with impairment in 2 domains (OR 5.32, p < 0.001). Conclusion Dysfunction of the olfactory, auditory, and vestibular systems is associated with a significantly increased risk of CI. The dramatically increased risk of CI with multisensory dysfunction in all three systems indicated that MSD may synergistically contribute to CI.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicOlfactory and Sensory Function StudiesFrench-language works237,207