Asian Cohort for Alzheimer’s Disease Pilot Study on Genetic and Non‐Genetic Risk Factors for Alzheimer’s Disease among Asian Americans and Canadians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Asian Americans and Canadians (ASACs) are the fastest growing minority group in the U.S. and Canada. However, ASACs are under‐sampled in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) research. To address the need of culturally appropriate clinical protocols and community‐based recruitment approaches for ASACs, the Asian Cohort for Alzheimer’s Disease (ACAD), the first large dementia genetics cohort currently focuses on Chinese, Korean, and Vietnamese, launched in 2021 to examine genetic and non‐genetic risk factors for AD among ASACs. Our clinical and community‐based participatory research (CPBR) scientists have a long collaborative history and diverse cultural and scientific training backgrounds: both are critical in leading AD and CBPR research. Method The ACAD pilot study has 7 recruiting sites (5 US and 2 Canadian), a coordinating site, and an analysis site. ACAD piloted a comprehensive study protocol including community outreach and recruitment strategies, the data collection packet (DCP), pre‐screening and sample collection procedures, and a centralized data management system in English, Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonese), Korean, and Vietnamese. To ensure the protocol consistency, ACAD implemented a training curriculum for the administration of the DCP and for culturally appropriate approaches to recruitment in collaboration with community partners, clinics, and nursing homes that serve Asian communities. Result As of December 2022, ACAD’s pilot study has consented 606 participants, 527 participants have complete DCP data submitted to REDCap (448 Chinese, 54 Korean, and 25 Vietnamese), and more than 1,500 people have expressed interests in ACAD. The majority 66.2%)women. The age range of the sample is 60‐93 years. 47.3% have college or graduate level education. 451 participants provided a saliva (274) or a blood (177) sample. Feedback in pilot indicates a need to adapt the Early Life Enrichment inventory further to apply to wartime deprivation conditions for this population, as well as more cultural tailored neuropsychological tests. Conclusion ACAD has learned valuable experience in interactions with ASACs and shown the feasibility of recruiting ASACs in clinical research. With an expansion plan and in collaboration with other AD research focuses on minority, insights from ACAD may identify potential novel, population‐specific therapeutic pathways for AD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".