MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387569741 · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2023.1257367

Cardiovascular disease risk models and dementia or cognitive decline: a systematic review

2023· review· en· W4387569741 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ruirui Jia, Qing Wang, Hengyi Huang, Yanli Yang, Yuet Foon Chung, Liang Tao

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Aging Neuroscience · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesLanzhou University
KeywordsDementiaMedicineCognitive declineGerontologySystematic reviewCochrane LibraryDiseasePopulationCognitionCohort studyMeta-analysisMEDLINEPsychiatryEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Health cognitive promotion and protection is a critical topic. With the world's aging population and rising life expectancy, there will be many people living with highly age-related dementia illnesses. Cardiovascular disease (CVD) and dementia share the same risk factors, such as unhealthy lifestyles and metabolic factors. These recognized risks associated with CVD and dementia frequently co-occur. CVD risk models may have a close association with dementia and cognitive decline. So, this systematic review aimed to determine whether CVD risk models were connected with dementia or cognitive decline and compare the predictive ability of various models. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, PsychINFO, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Sinomed, and WanFang were searched from 1 January 2014 until 16 February 2023. Only CVD risk models were included. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) for the quality assessment of included cohort studies and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) for cross-sectional studies. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement's guidelines were followed in this systematic study. Results: In all, 9,718 references were screened, of which 22 articles were included. A total of 15 CVD risk models were summarized. Except for the Cardiovascular Health in Ambulatory Care Research Team (CANHEART) health index, the other 14 CVD risk models were associated with dementia and cognitive decline. In comparison, different CVD risk models and domain-specific cognitive function correlation variation depended on cohort characteristics, risk models, cognitive function tests, and study designs. Moreover, it needed to be clarified when comparing the predicting performance of different CVD risk models. Conclusion: It is significant for public health to improve disease risk prediction and prevention and mitigate the potential adverse effects of the heart on the brain. More cohort studies are warranted to prove the correlation between CVD risk models and cognitive function. Moreover, further studies are encouraged to compare the efficacy of CVD risk models in predicting cognitive disorders.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.296 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations26
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Aging NeuroscienceSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207