Independent and joint associations of cardiometabolic multimorbidity and depression on cognitive function: findings from multi-regional cohorts and generalisation from community to clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Background Cardiometabolic multimorbidity (CMM) and depression are often co-occurring in older adults and associated with neurodegenerative outcomes. The present study aimed to estimate the independent and joint associations of CMM and depression on cognitive function in multi-regional cohorts, and to validate the generalizability of the findings in additional settings, including clinical. Methods Data harmonization was performed across 14 longitudinal cohort studies within the Cohort Studies of Memory in an International Consortium (COSMIC) group, spanning North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and Australia. Three external validation studies with distinct settings were employed for generalization. Participants were eligible for inclusion if they had data for CMM and were free of dementia at baseline. Baseline CMM was defined as: 1) CMM 5, ≥2 among hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, stroke, and heart disease and 2) CMM 3 (aligned with previous studies), ≥2 among diabetes, stroke, and heart disease. Baseline depression was primarily characterized by binary classification of depressive symptom measurements, employing the Geriatric Depression Scale and the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression scale. Global cognition was standardized as z-scores through harmonizing multiple cognitive measures. Longitudinal cognition was calculated as changes in global cognitive z-scores. A pooled individual participant data (IPD) analysis was utilized to estimate the independent and joint associations of CMM and depression on cognitive outcomes in COSMIC studies, both cross-sectionally and longitudinally. Repeated analyses were performed in three external validation studies. Findings Of the 32,931 older adults in the 14 COSMIC cohorts, we included 30,382 participants with complete data on baseline CMM, depression, and cognitive assessments for cross-sectional analyses. Among them, 22,599 who had at least 1 follow-up cognitive assessment were included in the longitudinal analyses. The three external studies for validation had 1964 participants from 3 multi-ethnic Asian older adult cohorts in different settings (community-based, memory clinic, and post-stroke study). In COSMIC studies, each of CMM and depression was independently associated with cross-sectional and longitudinal cognitive function, without significant interactions between them (Ps > 0.05). Participants with both CMM and depression had lower cross-sectional cognitive performance (e.g. β = −0.207, 95% CI = (−0.255, −0.159) for CMM5 (+)/depression (+)) and a faster rate of cognitive decline (e.g. β = −0.040, 95% CI = (−0.047, −0.034) for CMM5 (+)/depression (+)), compared with those without either condition. These associations remained consistent after additional adjustment for APOE genotype and were robust in two-step random-effects IPD analyses. The findings regarding the joint association of CMM and depression on cognitive function were reproduced in the three external validation studies. Interpretation Our findings highlighted the importance of investigating age-related co-morbidities in a multi-dimensional perspective. Targeting both cardiometabolic and psychological conditions to prevent cognitive decline could enhance effectiveness. Funding Natural Science Foundation of China and National Institute on Aging/National Institutes of 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 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 | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".