Transitions Between Mild Cognitive Impairment, Dementia, and Mortality: The Importance of Olfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The existing literature suggests that impaired olfaction may be an early marker for cognitive decline. Tracking the earliest stages of the progression to dementia is paramount, and yet the importance of olfactory ability throughout cognitive states and death remains unclear. METHODS: Drawing data from the Rush Memory and Aging Project (N = 1 501; 74% female), olfactory ability was assessed using the Brief Smell Identification Test (range = 0-16), while cognitive states (unimpaired, mild cognitive impairment [MCI], and dementia) were determined using a 3-step neuropsychological diagnostic protocol at up to 15 annual occasions. Multistate survival models simultaneously estimated the association of olfactory ability on transitions through cognitive states and death, while multinomial regression models estimated cognitively unimpaired and total life expectancies. RESULTS: Higher olfactory scores were associated with a reduced risk of transitioning from unimpaired cognition to MCI (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.82-0.88) and from MCI to dementia (HR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.86-0.93), indicating that 1-unit increase in olfactory scores was associated with an approximate 14% and 11% reduction in risk, respectively. Additionally, higher olfactory scores were associated with a greater likelihood of transitioning backward from MCI to unimpaired cognition (HR = 1.07, 95% CI = 1.02-1.12). Furthermore, higher baseline olfactory scores were associated with more years of longevity without cognitive impairment. However, olfaction was not associated with the transition to death when accounting for transitions through cognitive states. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that higher olfactory identification scores are associated with a decreased risk of transitioning to impaired cognitive states and that associations between olfaction and mortality may occur primarily through the pathway of neurodegeneration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".