Does the Association Between Eye Disease and Cognitive Function Vary by Genetic Risk of Cognitive Decline? An Analysis of Hospital Data With Replication in the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Age-related eye diseases are inconsistently associated with cognitive decline which could be due to effect modification. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether two genetic factors previously found to be associated with cognitive decline, the KIBRA (WWC1) and PDE7A/MTFR1 genes, modify the association between eye disease and cognitive function. Methods: Data from a Montreal hospital-based cross-sectional study (n = 302) were used for the primary analysis. Candidate single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) rs17070145 (KIBRA gene) and rs10808746 (PDE7A/MTFR1 gene) were included in linear regression models to test for effect modification of the relationship between eye disease (glaucoma or age-related macular degeneration [AMD]) and cognitive function. Six oral cognitive tests were used. A replication analysis was done using the Quebec data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) (n = 4238). Effect modifications by expanded genomic regions around the candidate SNPs were tested. Results: Three statistically significant interactions with two cognitive function measures -category verbal fluency and immediate story recall-were found in the Montreal study: glaucoma and AMD with rs17070145 and verbal fluency (P < 0.03) and glaucoma with rs10808746 with immediate story recall (P < 0.05). Similar interactions, although not with the same cognitive measure, were found in the CLSA: AMD with KIBRA and glaucoma with PDE7A/MTFR1. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the KIBRA and PDE7A/MTFR1 genes may modify the association between eye disease and cognitive function. This knowledge may help to better understand the mechanism by which glaucoma and AMD are related to cognitive function.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
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 | 0.012 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".