MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319339330 · doi:10.1016/j.yfrne.2023.101061

The impact of loneliness and social isolation on the development of cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s Disease

2023· review· en· W4319339330 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroendocrinology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicStress Responses and Cortisol
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteAlberta Children's HospitalOntario Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLonelinessSocial isolationDiseaseDementiaIntervention (counseling)PsychologyCognitionIsolation (microbiology)Cognitive declineAlzheimer's diseaseGerontologyClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatryBioinformaticsPathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is the leading cause of dementia, observed at a higher incidence in women compared with men. Treatments aimed at improving pathology in AD remain ineffective to stop disease progression. This makes the detection of the early intervention strategies to reduce future disease risk extremely important. Isolation and loneliness have been identified among the major risk factors for AD. The increasing prevalence of both loneliness and AD emphasizes the urgent need to understand this association to inform treatment. Here we present a comprehensive review of both clinical and preclinical studies that investigated loneliness and social isolation as risk factors for AD. We discuss that understanding the mechanisms of how loneliness exacerbates cognitive impairment and AD with a focus on sex differences will shed the light for the underlying mechanisms regarding loneliness as a risk factor for AD and to develop effective prevention or treatment strategies.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.266 · 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