MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416675481 · doi:10.1097/wad.0000000000000708

Do Education and Premorbid Intelligence Predict Cognitive Decline Over 1 Year in Rural Patients with Dementia?

2025· article· en· W4416675481 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Kirk, Megan E. O’Connell, Debra Morgan

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive declineCognitionCognitive reserveIntelligence quotientCognitive disorderAlzheimer's disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Education and premorbid intelligence have been used to predict disease trajectory in dementia. However, there is conflicting evidence regarding their independent predictive ability. This study aims to investigate whether education and premorbid intelligence predict cognitive and functional decline in rural dementia patients over 1 year. METHODS: Data from 614 rural patients was analyzed for the association between (a) years of education and (b) premorbid intelligence [Premorbid Verbal IQ] and cognitive function [MMSE, CDR-SB, NPI, FAQ] through linear regression analysis as an overall group sample, and stratified into Subjective Cognitive Impairment, Mild Cognitive Impairment, Alzheimer Disease, and Non-Alzheimer Disease dementia groups. Premorbid verbal IQ was estimated using the Wechsler Test of Adult Reading & Wide Range Achievement Test 4th Edition, after norming each was scored on a scale of 100. RESULTS: Higher Premorbid Verbal IQ score predicted a smaller decline in cognition in the overall group sample and reduced caregiver dependence in the non-AD dementia group 1-year post-diagnosis. Education was not a statistically significant predictive factor of cognition 1-year post-diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Higher premorbid intelligence may be a better 1-year prognostic indicator of cognition and function than education level in rural 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)0.000
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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.701

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 venueAlzheimer Disease & Associated DisordersSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207