MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406971995 · doi:10.2196/66104

Comparison of 3 Aging Metrics in Dual Declines to Capture All-Cause Dementia and Mortality Risk: Cohort Study

2025· article· en· W4406971995 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anying Bai, Yu Jiang, Weihao Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Aging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province
KeywordsDementiaMedicineConfoundingGerontologyProportional hazards modelCohort studyCohortLongitudinal studyOdds ratioCognitive declineDemographyInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The utility of aging metrics that incorporate cognitive and physical function is not fully understood. Objective: We aim to compare the predictive capacities of 3 distinct aging metrics-motoric cognitive risk syndrome (MCR), physio-cognitive decline syndrome (PCDS), and cognitive frailty (CF)-for incident dementia and all-cause mortality among community-dwelling older adults. Methods: We used longitudinal data from waves 10-15 of the Health and Retirement Study. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was employed to evaluate the effects of MCR, PCDS, and CF on incident all-cause dementia and mortality, controlling for socioeconomic and lifestyle factors, as well as medical comorbidities. Discrimination analysis was conducted to assess and compare the predictive accuracy of the 3 aging metrics. Results: A total of 2367 older individuals aged 65 years and older, with no baseline prevalence of dementia or disability, were ultimately included. The prevalence rates of MCR, PCDS, and CF were 5.4%, 6.3%, and 1.3%, respectively. Over a decade-long follow-up period, 341 cases of dementia and 573 deaths were recorded. All 3 metrics were predictive of incident all-cause dementia and mortality when adjusting for multiple confounders, with variations in the strength of their associations (incident dementia: MCR odds ratio [OR] 1.90, 95% CI 1.30-2.78; CF 5.06, 95% CI 2.87-8.92; PCDS 3.35, 95% CI 2.44-4.58; mortality: MCR 1.60, 95% CI 1.17-2.19; CF 3.26, 95% CI 1.99-5.33; and PCDS 1.58, 95% CI 1.17-2.13). The C-index indicated that PCDS and MCR had the highest discriminatory accuracy for all-cause dementia and mortality, respectively. Conclusions: Despite the inherent differences among the aging metrics that integrate cognitive and physical functions, they consistently identified risks of dementia and mortality. This underscores the importance of implementing targeted preventive strategies and intervention programs based on these metrics to enhance the overall quality of life and reduce premature deaths in aging populations.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.360 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR AgingSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207