Co‐morbidity of sensory loss (hearing, vision, olfaction) in persons with or at risk for dementia: Implications for brain structure and function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Hearing, vision, and olfactory loss have each independently been associated with cognitive decline and increased risk for dementia. Research has examined their individual relationships with brain structure and function, but these predictors have not been examined together in older adults who vary along a spectrum of risk for dementia. We examined groups who range from relatively low risk (those with normal cognition and no cognitive complaints (NC)), to those with higher risk, namely individuals with subjective reports of cognitive decline (SCD) but normal cognition and those with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Method We used data from the Comprehensive Assessment of Neurodegeneration and Dementia (COMPASS‐ND) study. Hearing loss was assessed with a pure‐tone screening protocol and a speech‐in‐noise test, vision was assessed with the MNRead for visual acuity and the MARS test for contrast sensitivity, and olfaction was assessed with the Brief Smell Identification Test (BSIT). We examined the frequency of sensory deficits in 60 NC (mean age = 69 years; mean education = 16 years), 55 participants with SCD (age = 70; education = 17), 102 with MCI (age = 72; education = 16), and 47 with Alzheimer’s disease (AD, age = 75; education = 15). Participants were matched on age and education, except for AD participants who were older. Results The frequency of having at least one impairment in at least one sensory domain increased across groups (55% NC, 62% SCD, 75% MCI, 96% AD). A deficit in olfaction was the most common single deficit. Sensory deficits became increasing more co‐morbid across the risk spectrum. Hearing loss and olfaction loss were each associated with lower hippocampal volume and hearing loss was associated with alterations in functional brain connectivity in the default mode network. Conclusion These analyses indicate that sensory loss is highly frequent and co‐morbid in persons with or at risk for dementia. These findings have implications for cognition, brain function, functional activities, and care delivery for persons with or at 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".