MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402388631 · doi:10.5770/cgj.27.782

Poster Session Abstracts from the Canadian Consortium on Neurodegeneration in Aging (CCNA) Partners Forum and Science Days 2024

2024· article· en· W4402388631 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geriatrics Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHealth, Environment, Cognitive Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSession (web analytics)NeurodegenerationGerontologyMedical educationWorld Wide WebInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plain Language Summary: Antidepressants are common and taken for a long time.Our goal was to determine if antidepressants increase dementia risk.We included frailty, sex, and how long participants were taking antidepressants as potential factors in dementia risk.Our results suggest that antidepressants do not increase the risk of dementia, but that frailty, being male sex, and older age do in the population studied. Background:In Canada, antidepressant medications (ADM) are the largest drug category in terms of prescription volume.Previous study of the relationship between ADM exposure and dementia is inconsistent.The objective of this secondary analysis was to investigate the relationship between frailty, sex, duration of ADM exposure, and the development of clinical dementia. Method:This was a retrospective cohort study of the Religious Orders Study.Participants' health data was collected annually from enrollment to death.A 24-item frailty index was created.ADM use was defined as exposure to any antidepressant annually.Dementia was defined clinically as either Alzheimer's disease or another primary cause; excluding mild cognitive impairment.A general logistic regression model was used to assess the role of the variables: age, frailty, sex, ADM exposure, and duration of ADM exposure, on the outcome of dementia.Result: There were 1828 participants, 26% were male.The mean age was 89.76.1.Preliminary results of a multivariable logistic regression model indicated that neither ADM exposure nor duration of ADM use was associated with an increased the risk of dementia.Three of the variables in the model revealed a statistically significant relationship to the development of dementia: age (OR: 1.09, 95%CI (1.03, 1.15)), sex (OR: 2.27, 95%CI (1.14, 4.47)), and frailty (OR: 9.08, 95%CI (1.99, 3983.37)). Conclusion:Our findings conclude that neither ADM use nor increased duration of ADM use was associated with dementia.Future work will investigate if ADM exposure is related to the development of dementia related neuropathology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score0.851

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geriatrics JournalSame topicHealth, Environment, Cognitive AgingFrench-language works237,207