Dementia, infections and vaccines: 30 years of controversy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports the proceedings of a virtual meeting convened by the European Interdisciplinary Council on Ageing (EICA), to discuss the involvement of infectious disorders in the pathogenesis of dementia and neurological disorders leading to dementia. We recap how our view of the infectious etiology of dementia has changed over the last 30 years in light of emerging evidence, and we present evidence in support of the implication of infection in dementia, notably Alzheimer's disease (AD). The bacteria and viruses thought to be responsible for neuroinflammation and neurological damage are reviewed. We then review the genetic basis for neuroinflammation and dementia, highlighting the genes that are currently the focus of investigation as potential targets for therapy. Next, we describe the antimicrobial hypothesis of dementia, notably the intriguing possibility that amyloid beta may itself possess antimicrobial properties. We further describe the clinical relevance of the gut-brain axis in dementia, the mechanisms by which infection can move from the intestine to the brain, and recent findings regarding dysbiosis patterns in patients with AD. We review the involvement of specific pathogens in neurological disorders, i.e. SARS-CoV-2, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV1), and influenza. Finally, we look at the role of vaccination to prevent dementia. In conclusion, there is a large body of evidence supporting the involvement of various infectious pathogens in the pathogenesis of dementia, but large-scale studies with long-term follow-up are needed to elucidate the role that infection may play, especially before subclinical or clinical disease is present.
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 | 0.023 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.022 | 0.029 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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".