MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Data_Sheet_1_Risk of dementia or cognitive impairment in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.doc

2022· dataset· en· W6927533942 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEnterobacteriaceae and Cronobacter Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaFatty liverChecklistDiseaseVascular dementiaCognitive impairmentMeta-analysisCohort studyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives<p>To investigate whether non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) increases the risk of dementia or cognitive impairment.</p>Methods<p>A systematic search of the literature in the PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases was conducted, covering the period from the inception of each database to 22 May 2022. Statistical analysis of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and the risk of cognitive impairment or dementia based on data extracted from each article was performed using Stata software v. 16.0. The quality of this study was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of cohort and case-control studies and the American Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) methodology checklist for assessing the quality of cross-sectional studies. Funnel plots and the Egger's test were used to assess publication bias.</p>Results<p>We included 7 studies comprising 891,562 individuals from 6 countries, which were published between 2020 and 2022. The pooling analysis showed that a history of NAFLD was associated with cognitive impairment [odds ratio (OR) = 1.44; 95% CI: 1.17–1.78; heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup>) = 0%; P = 0.001]. A history of NAFLD was not associated with an increased risk of all-cause dementia (OR = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.97–1.09; I<sup>2</sup> = 84.7%; P = 0.341) or Alzheimer disease (OR = 0.95; 95% CI: 0.83–1.09; I<sup>2</sup> = 61.0%; P = 0.489). In contrast, NAFLD was associated with an obvious reduction of the risk of vascular dementia (OR = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.79–0.98; I<sup>2</sup> = 0.0%; P = 0.020). In the subgroup analysis, male and female patients with NAFLD showed an equal risk of dementia or cognitive impairment. The risk of dementia or cognitive impairment in the cross-sectional study (OR = 1.49; 95% CI: 1.19–1.88; I<sup>2</sup> = 0.0%; P = 0.001) was slightly higher than that in the retrospective cohort (OR = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.97–1.09; I<sup>2</sup> = 84.3%; P = 0.294).</p>Conclusions<p>NAFLD was associated with an increased risk of cognitive impairment and a decreased risk of vascular dementia. More studies are needed to clarify the pathophysiological mechanism underlying the association between NAFLD and dementia or cognitive impairment.</p>Systematic review registration<p>https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails, identifier: CRD42022334492.</p>

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.719
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3770.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.279 · 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