Relative associations of behavioral and physiological risks for cardiometabolic disease with cognition in bipolar disorder during mid and later-life: findings from the UK biobank
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiometabolic disease risk factors are disproportionately prevalent in bipolar disorder (BD) and are associated with cognitive impairment. It is, however, unknown which health risk factors for cardiometabolic disease are relevant to cognition in BD. This study aimed to identify the cardiometabolic disease risk factors that are the most important correlates of cognitive impairment in BD; and to examine whether the nature of the relationships vary between mid and later life. METHODS: Data from the UK Biobank were available for 966 participants with BD, aged between 40 and 69 years. Individual cardiometabolic disease risk factors were initially regressed onto a global cognition score in separate models for the following risk factor domains; (1) health risk behaviors (physical activity, sedentary behavior, smoking, and sleep) and (2) physiological risk factors, stratified into (2a) anthropometric and clinical risk (handgrip strength, body composition, and blood pressure), and (2b) cardiometabolic disease risk biomarkers (CRP, lipid profile, and HbA1c). A final combined multivariate regression model for global cognition was then fitted, including only the predictor variables that were significantly associated with cognition in the previous models. RESULTS: In the final combined model, lower mentally active and higher passive sedentary behavior, higher levels of physical activity, inadequate sleep duration, higher systolic and lower diastolic blood pressure, and lower handgrip strength were associated with worse global cognition. CONCLUSIONS: Health risk behaviors, as well as blood pressure and muscular strength, are associated with cognitive function in BD, whereas other traditional physiological cardiometabolic disease risk factors are not.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".