MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405017982 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000210131

Magnitude and Time-Course of Dementia Risk in Stroke Survivors

2024· article· en· W4405017982 on OpenAlexaffabout
Raed A. Joundi, Jiming Fang, Peter C. Austin, Eric E. Smith, Amy Yu, Vladimir Hachinski, Luciano A. Sposato, Aravind Ganesh, Mukul Sharma, Moira K. Kapral

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaStroke (engine)MedicinePsychologyGerontologyInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Survivors of stroke are at high risk of dementia, but it is unclear whether this elevated risk is due to other confounding factors. We sought to determine the magnitude and time course of dementia risk after stroke with robust comparison with matched nonstroke populations in an entire province. METHODS: We conducted a population-wide analysis of over 15 million people in Ontario, Canada, between 2002 and 2022. Using linked administrative databases, we identified adults hospitalized for ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, or acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We performed 1:1 matching of people with stroke to all residents of Ontario (reference population) without stroke and separately to those with AMI, on age, sex, rural residence, neighborhood deprivation, and vascular comorbidities. We calculated the incident rate per 100 person-years and hazard ratios (HRs) for all-cause dementia between 90 days after stroke and 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, and total follow-up and evaluated time-varying HRs. In sensitivity analyses, we adjusted for new stroke in follow-up and the cumulative number of health care encounters. RESULTS: Of 175,980 stroke survivors, 174,817 (99.3%) were successfully matched to people in the reference population and 151,673 (90%) were matched to those with AMI. Over a mean follow-up of 5.6 years (SD 4.71, maximum 20 years), a total of 32,621 (18.7%) were diagnosed with dementia after stroke compared with 21,929 (12.5%) in the Ontario reference population. The rate of dementia per 100 person-years over total follow-up time was higher after acute stroke compared with the reference population (3.34 vs 1.89) and the AMI cohort (3.19 vs 1.75). The HR of dementia was higher in those with stroke compared with the reference population (1.76, 95% CI 1.73-1.79) and the AMI cohort (1.82, 1.79-1.85). HRs varied across time, with over 2.5-fold increase in dementia risk within 1 year, decreasing to 1.5-fold at 5 years and 1.3-fold at 20 years after stroke. Estimates were similar in sensitivity analyses. Recurrent stroke was associated with 3-fold increased dementia risk. DISCUSSION: In this population-wide study, almost one-fifth of stroke survivors were diagnosed with dementia, with an 80% higher risk of dementia after robust matching to those without stroke. Targeted dementia prevention efforts in acute and chronic survivors of stroke are needed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207