Differential Impact of Stroke on Cognitive Impairment in Mexican Americans and Non-Hispanic White Americans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The association between stroke and dementia is well established. Less is known about this association in underrepresented ethnic groups. In a large ethnically diverse cohort, we examined whether history of stroke was associated with cognitive impairment, and whether this relationship differed by ethnicity (Mexican American [MA] versus non-Hispanic White). Methods: This was a population-based cohort study conducted in Nueces County, TX, a biethnic community with a large and primarily nonimmigrant MA population. Residents aged ≥65 were recruited door-to-door or by telephone between May 2018 and December 2021. The primary exposure was history of stroke, obtained by self-report. Demographic, medical, and educational histories were also obtained. The primary outcome was the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a scale that evaluates multiple domains of cognitive performance. Scores were divided into 3 ordinal categories, roughly corresponding to normal cognition (MoCA 26–30), mild cognitive impairment (MoCA 20–25), or probable dementia (MoCA 0–19). Results: One thousand eight hundred one participants completed MoCA screening (55% female; 50% MA, 44% Non-Hispanic White, 6% other), of whom 12.4% reported history of stroke. Stroke prevalence was similar across ethnicities (X 2 2.1; P =0.34). In a multivariable cumulative logit regression model for the ordinal cognition outcome, a stroke by ethnicity interaction was observed ( P =0.01). Models stratified by ethnicity revealed that stroke was associated with cognitive impairment across ethnicities, but had greater impact on cognition in non-Hispanic Whites (cumulative odds ratio=3.81 [95% CI, 2.37–6.12]) than in MAs (cumulative odds ratio=1.58 [95% CI, 1.04–2.41]). Increased age and lower educational attainment were also associated with cognitive impairment, regardless of ethnicity. Conclusions: History of stroke was associated with increased odds of cognitive impairment after controlling for other factors in both MA and Non-Hispanic White participants. The magnitude of the impact of stroke on cognition was less in MA than in Non-Hispanic White participants.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".