Elevated Blood Homocysteine Increases the Risk of Incident Motoric Cognitive Risk Syndrome: A Two-Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Motoric Cognitive Risk (MCR) syndrome, a predementia syndrome characterized by cognitive complaints and slow gait, may have an underlying vascular etiology. Elevated blood levels of homocysteine, a known vascular risk factor, have been linked to physical and cognitive decline in older adults, though the relationship with MCR is unknown. We aimed to identify the association between homocysteine and MCR risk. METHODS: We examined the association between baseline homocysteine levels and incident MCR using Cox proportional hazard models in 1826 community-dwelling older adults (55% women) from 2 cohorts (Einstein Aging Study [EAS] and Quebec Longitudinal Study on Nutrition and Successful Aging [NuAge]). We calculated hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), for each cohort as well as stratified by sex and vascular disease/risk factors. RESULTS: Median follow-up time was 2.2 years in EAS and 3.0 years in NuAge. Individuals with elevated baseline homocysteine levels (>14 µmol/L) had a significantly higher risk of incident MCR compared to those with normal levels in NuAge (HR 1.41, 95% CI: 1.01-1.97, p = .04), after adjusting for covariates. Our exploratory stratified analyses found that these associations were significant only in men with vascular disease/risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Higher blood homocysteine levels are associated with an increased risk of developing MCR in older adults, particularly in men with vascular disease or vascular risk factors.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".