MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390192611 · doi:10.1002/alz.071052

Deficit accumulation in relation to dementia and survival outcomes in residential care older adults

2023· article· en· W4390192611 on OpenAlexaffabout
Xiaowei Song, Brian Greeley, Hilary Low, Jenny K. Hoang, Ronald Kelly, Robert C. McDermid

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsFraser Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaGerontologyMedicineDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background As people age, they are more likely to accumulate health deficits leading to an increased risk of adverse outcomes, including dementia. In community‐dwelling older adults, even combining only the deficits traditionally unrelated to dementia predicts dementia. Previously, we reported an association between deficit accumulation and dementia in residential care. Here, our objectives are to 1) understand the profiles of deficit accumulation and the relationships between traditional and non‐traditional dementia risk factors in older residents with or without dementia and 2) investigate the impact of deficit accumulation on dementia and survival outcomes in residential‐care older adults. Method We analyzed the first full‐assessment data of older adults in InterRAI Residential Care (RAI‐RC MDS2.0) who enrolled in facilities under the care of Fraser Health Canada between 2010 and 2019 (female = 63.8%, mean age = 84.6±8.0 years). Dementia diagnoses (n = 18169), including pure Alzheimer’s disease (AD), mixed AD, other dementia, and no dementia (n = 11,589), were recorded at annual assessments. Two indices were constructed as the mean of the coded deficits between 0 (absent) and 1 (present), employing the same descriptive levels as in the original assessment. One index contained 20 traditional dementia risk factors (e.g., cognition, hypertension, and heart disease); the other contained 20 non‐traditional ones (e.g., vision, hearing, arthritis, and continence). Participants were followed until 2021. Relationships between the indices and their impact on survival were tested. Incidental dementia outcome was examined for the non‐demented sub‐sample. Result Over 92% of residents had at least one daily‐living dependency. The two indices were highly correlated (R = 0.59, p<.001), and each positively related to mortality, regardless of dementia diagnoses. People with dementia accumulated more deficits and had a higher mean traditional risk index than those without dementia (F = 334.72, p<.001), while the latter group accumulated more non‐traditional risk factors on average (F = 135.39, p<.001). A higher level of the indices showed variable risks of incidental dementia at follow‐ups (p’s<.05). Conclusion Older residents without dementia are dominated by dependent living with a distinct deficit accumulation profile than those with dementia. Deficit accumulation has negative impact on both dementia and survival outcomes in residential care.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designObservational
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→