MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386731052 · doi:10.1093/ageing/afad156.009

105 Antiplatelet therapy and incident cognitive impairment or dementia—a systematic review and Meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.

2023· article· en· W4386731052 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Kitt, Robert Murphy, Aileen Clarke, Catriona Reddin, John Ferguson, Jackie Bosch, William Whiteley, Michelle Canavan, Conor Judge, Martin O’Donnell

Bibliographic record

VenueAge and Ageing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDementiaOdds ratioRandomized controlled trialPlaceboMeta-analysisInternal medicineClinical trialConfidence intervalPhysical therapyIncidence (geometry)Disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The benefit of antiplatelet therapy in the prevention of cognitive impairment or dementia is uncertain. We investigated the association between antiplatelet therapy with incident cognitive impairment or dementia in randomised clinical trials. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for randomised clinical trials published from database inception through Feb 1st, 2023. Trials that evaluated the association of antiplatelet therapy with incident cognitive impairment or dementia were included. For single agent antiplatelet, the control group was placebo and for dual agent antiplatelet therapy, the control group was single agent monotherapy. Two authors screened and independently extracted all data, and a random-effects meta-analysis model was used to report pooled treatment effects and 95% Confidence Intervals. The primary outcome was incident cognitive impairment or dementia. Secondary outcomes included change in cognitive test scores. Results Eleven randomised clinical trials were eligible for inclusion (109,860 participants), all of which reported the incidence of cognitive impairment or dementia on follow-up. The mean (SD) age of trial participants was 66.2 (7.9) years and 46,150 (42%) were women. The mean duration of follow-up was 70 months. Antiplatelet therapy, compared to control, was not significantly associated with a reduced risk of cognitive impairment or dementia (11 trials; 109,860 participants) (3.49% vs 4.18% of patients over a mean trial follow-up of 5.8 years; odds ratio [OR], 0.94 [95% CI, 0.88–1.00]; absolute risk reduction, 0.2% [95% CI, −0.4% to 0.009%]; I2 = 0.0%). Antiplatelet therapy was not significantly associated with mean change in cognitive test scores. Conclusion In this meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials, antiplatelet therapy was not significantly associated with a lower risk of incident cognitive impairment or dementia. The confidence intervals around this outcome do not exclude a modest preventative effect, and at a population level this could have a substantial benefit. Further large trials with longer term follow up are needed.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.297
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.130 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAge and AgeingSame topicNeurological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207