Association between metabolic syndrome and risk of incident dementia in UK Biobank
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The association between metabolic syndrome (MetS) and incident dementia remains inconclusive. METHODS: In 176,249 dementia-free UK Biobank participants aged ≥60 years at baseline, Cox proportional-hazards models were used to investigate the association between MetS and incident dementia. MetS was defined as the presence of ≥3 of the following: elevated waist circumference, triglycerides, blood pressure, blood glucose, and reduced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. RESULTS: Over 15 years of follow-up (median = 12.3), 5255 participants developed dementia. MetS was associated with an increased risk of incident dementia (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06, 1.18). The association remained consistent when restricting to longer follow-up intervals: >5 to 10 years (HR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.27) and >10 years (HR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.12, 1.32). Stronger associations were observed in those with ≥4 MetS components and in apolipoprotein-E (APOE)-ε4 non-carriers. DISCUSSION: In this large population-based prospective cohort, MetS was associated with an increased risk of dementia. HIGHLIGHTS: MetS was associated with a 12% increased risk of incident all-cause dementia. Associations remained similar after restricting the analysis to those with longer follow-up. The presence of four or five MetS components was significantly associated with dementia. Stronger associations were observed in those with a low genetic risk for dementia.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".