Identification of a Link between Suspected Metabolic Syndrome and Cognitive Impairment within Pharmaceutical Care in Adults over 75 Years of Age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prevalence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) and cognitive impairment (CI) is increasing with age. MetS reduces overall cognition, and CI predicts an increased risk of drug-related problems. We investigated the impact of suspected MetS (sMetS) on cognition in an aging population receiving pharmaceutical care in a different state of old age (60–74 vs. 75+ years). Presence or absence of sMetS (sMetS+ or sMetS−) was assessed according to criteria modified for the European population. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score, being ≤24 points, was used to identify CI. We found a lower MoCA score (18.4 ± 6.0) and a higher rate of CI (85%) in the 75+ group when compared to younger old subjects (23.6 ± 4.3; 51%; p < 0.001). In the age group of 75+, a higher occurrence, of MoCA ≤ 24 points, was in sMetS+ (97%) as compared to sMetS− (80% p < 0.05). In the age group of 60–74 years, a MoCA score of ≤24 points was identified in 63% of sMetS+ when compared to 49% of sMetS− (NS). Conclusively, we found a higher prevalence of sMetS, the number of sMetS components and lower cognitive performance in subjects aged 75+. This age, the occurrence of sMetS and lower education can predict 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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".