Risk of cognitive decline among patients with dengue virus infection: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dengue fever, caused by the dengue virus and transmitted through Aedes mosquitoes, is a growing public health concern, particularly in tropical and subtropical regions. Traditionally associated with febrile and hemorrhagic symptoms, recent research suggests a potential link between dengue and cognitive impairments. This systematic review assessed existing research to understand the association between dengue virus infection and cognitive impairments, including dementia, Alzheimer disease, memory loss, and confusion. This systematic review followed preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science up to January 18, 2024. Studies examining the prevalence and association of cognitive impairments in dengue patients were included. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed using Nested Knowledge software and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Of the 1129 articles identified, 5 were included in the review, covering a total of 200 873 participants from Taiwan, Brazil, and France. Evidence from population-based cohort studies indicated short-term cognitive impairments, including confusion and memory loss, in some dengue patients. Additionally, long-term risks of dementia, including Alzheimer disease and vascular dementia, were observed, particularly among older adults. Although the findings suggest there might be an association between dengue infection and cognitive decline, the mechanisms underlying this link remain unclear. This systematic review suggests that dengue virus infection may affect cognitive function in both acute and long-term contexts. However, the current evidence is not strong enough to establish a conclusive link. Further research with larger sample sizes and longitudinal studies is essential to confirm the impact of dengue virus on cognitive 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 | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".