Prevalence and Risk Factors for Abnormal m-TICS
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The lack of effective treatments for Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) underscores the importance of prevention and early detection of amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI), its prodromal state. While studies have proposed a number of potential mechanisms underlying the pathogenesis of AD, such as hypoxia and neuropsychiatric symptoms, little research has been done to evaluate predictive risk factors. Objective: The objective of this pilot study is to assess the prevalence and risk factors for aMCI. Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed using data from patients screened for Memories 2, a clinical trial evaluating the effect of CPAP usage in patients with both obstructive sleep apnea and aMCI. The study included patients recruited from the Jefferson Sleep Center between the ages of 55 and 85. Subjects were divided into two groups based on their score in the Modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (m-TICS): (a) positive screen (+) for aMCI (m-TICS score = 28-35), and (b) negative screen (-) for aMCI (m-TICS score < 28). Risk factors were assessed using multivariate analysis. Results: The prevalence of + aMCI among patients in a primary care setting was X% (n=total). + aMCI was more likely to be associated with increased age (p = ) and multiple comorbidities (p= ). Specifically, patients with aMCI were more likely to have cardiovascular disease and current depressive symptoms. Discussion: The preliminary results of this pilot study suggest a potential role for aMCI risk factor profiling in patients with OSA. A larger study is needed to adequately compare the predictive value of specific risk factors for aMCI.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it