MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384120836 · doi:10.1519/jpt.0000000000000386

Older Adults With Alzheimer's Disease Have Lower Bone Mineral Density Compared to Older Adults Without Dementia: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis of Observational Studies

2023· review· en· W4384120836 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Natália Oiring de Castro Cezar, Stéfany Gomes da Silva, Jéssica Bianca Aily, Marcos Paulo Braz de Oliveira, Marcos de Noronha, Stela Márcia Mattiello

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geriatric Physical Therapy · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDementiaBone mineralFemoral neckMeta-analysisOsteoporosisObservational studyPhysical therapyStrictly standardized mean differenceInternal medicineGerontologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The literature has associated bone mineral density (BMD) and Alzheimer's disease (AD). The aim of the present systematic review was to investigate BMD in older adults with AD compared with older adults with no dementia. METHODS: Searches were performed in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases from inception to May 2022. Observational studies that compared BMD in the populations of interest were included. Methodical quality (risk of bias) was appraised using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated for meta-analyses. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Five studies were included, involving a total of 1772 older adults (373 with AD and 1399 with no dementia). A first meta-analysis compared 207 older adults with AD and 1243 with no dementia for BMD in the femoral neck. The results showed lower BMD in the AD groups (SMD =-1.52; 95% CI, -2.61 to -0.42; P = .007, low quality of evidence). A second meta-analysis considering different sites of the body (whole body, trunk, femur, and lumbar spine) also showed lower BMD in older adults with AD compared with the group with no dementia (SMD =-0.98; 95% CI, -1.91 to -0.05; P = .04, low quality of evidence). Newcastle-Ottawa Scale scores ranged from 7 to 9, indicating low risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Bone mineral density is lower in older adults with AD than in older adults with no dementia, especially in the femoral neck. These results suggest that older adults with AD may be at greater risk of developing osteopenia and osteoporosis. Current clinical practice guidelines should be amended for screening frequency and methodology for this particular cohort. Further studies are needed to confirm whether older people with AD have lower BMD in other sites of the body.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.042
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.201
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geriatric Physical TherapySame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207