MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406219193 · doi:10.1002/alz.092317

Audiometric hearing level in individuals with SCD, MCI and mild dementia

2024· article· en· W4406219193 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chatchawan Rattanabannakit, Poramad Sirikuntharamas, Triphoom Suwanwech, Sarun Prakairungthong, Witsarut Nanthasi, Vorapun Senanarong

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAudiologyDementiaMedicinePsychologyInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Hearing impairment is identified as a risk factor for dementia. This study aimed to investigate audiometric hearing level in individuals across the clinical spectrum of cognitive impairment, from normal cognition (NC) to mild dementia, encompassing subjective cognitive decline (SCD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Method 135 participants were included in this study. There were 33 NC participants, 36 participants with SCD, 34 participants with MCI, and 33 participants with mild dementia. Demographic data was collected, along with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and the Cognitive Change Index to capture subjective cognitive complaints from patients themselves (CCI‐S) and their informants (CCI‐I). All participants underwent tonal audiometry to measure the best air‐conduction and bone‐conduction hearing threshold, speech recognition test (SRT) and word recognition score (WRS). Association of audiometric data and cognitive function and their differences between diagnostic groups were analyzed. Result The median age of all participants was 61.5 (IQR = 19) years, 77.2% were female, median years of education was 14.5 (IQR = 7) years. There were significant differences in age, education, and visual acuity among groups (all p<0.001) (Table). Air‐conduction and bone‐conduction hearing thresholds demonstrated significant differences between groups (all p<0.001), which the worst performance observed in the mild dementia group (p<0.001), even after controlling for age and education (p = 0.013). 63.2% of all participants were defined as having hearing impairment according to WHO criteria, peaking at 93.94% in mild dementia patients. Individuals with moderate hearing impairment demonstrated lower MoCA score and higher CCI‐I scores, compared to those with mild or no hearing impairment. The higher air‐conduction, bone‐conduction hearing threshold, SRT, WRS were significantly correlated with the lower score of MoCA (r = ‐0.47 to ‐0.36, all p<0.001) and a higher score of CCI‐I (r = 0.31 to 0.39, all p<0.001), but not the CCI‐S. However, these associations became insignificant after controlling for age (all p>0.05). Conclusion Our study indicates a link between diminishing audiometric hearing levels and a higher degree of objective cognitive decline, along with an increased level of informant perception regarding individuals' cognitive deficits. Not related to age or education, individuals with mild dementia display significantly worse hearing than those without.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics→French-language works237,207→