MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399812783 · doi:10.2337/dc24-0537

Association of Metabolic Syndrome With Neuroimaging and Cognitive Outcomes in the UK Biobank

2024· article· en· W4399812783 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Danial Qureshi, Anya Topiwala, Shehab Uddin Al Abid, Naomi E. Allen, Elżbieta Kuźma, Thomas J. Littlejohns

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Care · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of AgingUniversity of OxfordUK Research and InnovationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford
KeywordsMedicineDementiaMetabolic syndromeNeuroimagingWaistCognitionEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceInternal medicineVerbal memoryBrain sizeBiobankHyperintensityCognitive declineMemory clinicPsychiatryBody mass indexObesityMagnetic resonance imagingBioinformaticsDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Metabolic syndrome (MetS) has been linked to dementia. In this study, we examined the association of MetS with neuroimaging and cognition in dementia-free adults, offering insight into the impact of MetS on brain health prior to dementia onset. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We included 37,395 dementia-free adults from the UK Biobank database. MetS was defined as having at least three of the following components: larger waist circumference; elevated levels of triglycerides, blood pressure, HbA1c; or reduced HDL cholesterol levels. Multivariable-adjusted linear regression was used to assess associations of MetS with structural neuroimaging and cognitive domains. RESULTS: MetS was associated with lower total brain (standardized β: -0.06; 95% CI -0.08, -0.04), gray matter (β: -0.10; 95% CI -0.12, -0.08) and hippocampal (for left side, β: -0.03, 95% CI -0.05, -0.01; for right side, β: -0.04, 95% CI -0.07, -0.02) volumes, and greater white matter hyperintensity (WMH) volume (β: 0.08; 95% CI 0.06, 0.11). Study participants with MetS performed poorer on cognitive tests of working memory (β: -0.10; 95% CI -0.13, -0.07), verbal declarative memory (β: -0.08; 95% CI -0.11, -0.05), processing speed (β: -0.06; 95% CI -0.09, -0.04), verbal and numerical reasoning (β: -0.07; 95% CI -0.09, -0.04), nonverbal reasoning (β: -0.03; 95% CI -0.05, -0.01), and on tests of executive function, where higher scores indicated poorer performance (β: 0.05; 95% CI 0.03, 0.08). More MetS components were also associated with less brain volume, greater WMH, and poorer cognition across all domains. CONCLUSIONS: MetS was associated poorer brain health in dementia-free adults, characterized by less brain volume, greater vascular pathology, and poorer cognition. Further research is necessary to understand whether reversal or improvement of MetS can improve brain health.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations33
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetes CareSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207