Association between dietary inflammatory index and cognitive impairment: A meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: Cognitive impairment is an increasingly urgent global public health challenge. Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) is a literature-derived score that links diet to inflammation. The relationship between DII and cognitive impairment remains controversial. Therefore, our study aimed to analysis the role of DII on the risk of cognitive impairment by meta-analysis. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Web of Science and EMBASE databases were searched up to July 2022. Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) and Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklist were performed to estimate the quality of studies. Results: Nine observational studies with 19,379 subjects were included. Our study found that higher DII could elevate the risk of cognitive impairment (OR = 1.46, 95%CI = 1.26, 1.69). Meanwhile, the OR of cognitive impairment was 1.49 (95%CI = 1.21, 1.83) for cross-sectional studies and 1.42 (95%CI = 1.12, 1.79) for cohort studies, respectively. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis indicated that higher DII (indicating a more pro-inflammatory diet) is related to increased risk of cognitive impairment.
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 | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.032 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".