Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29718387›Full record

ArticleThe journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences2020

Investigating Predictors of Cognitive Decline Using Machine Learning.

Ramon Casanova, Santiago Saldana, Michael W Lutz, Brenda L Plassman, Maragatha Kuchibhatla, Kathleen M Hayden

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Cognitive Impairment and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Take-Up Among the Eligible Older Americans.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Ramon CasanovaDepartment of Biostatistical Sciences, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston Salem, North Carolina.
Santiago SaldanaDepartment of Biostatistical Sciences, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston Salem, North Carolina.
Michael W LutzDepartment of Neurology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Brenda L PlassmanDepartment of Neurology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Maragatha KuchibhatlaDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Kathleen M HaydenDepartment of Social Sciences and Health Policy, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston Salem, North Carolina.

Funding

Wake Forest Alzheimer's Disease Core CenterP30AG049638 · NIA · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI RAPP, STEPHEN R · 2016 to 2020
$12.2M
Genes, environments, interactions, and cognitive decline in the HRSR01AG042633 · NIA · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI HAYDEN, KATHLEEN M · 2014 to 2016
$876k
NIA NIH HHS L30 AG074138NIA NIH HHS P30 AG049638NIA NIH HHS R01 AG042633
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesGenetic risks for cognitive decline are not modifiable; however their relative importance compared to modifiable factors is unclear. We used machine learning to evaluate modifiable and genetic risk factors for Alzheimer's disease (AD), to predict cognitive decline.

methodsHealth and Retirement Study participants, aged 65-90 years, with DNA and >2 cognitive evaluations, were included (n = 7,142). Predictors included age, body mass index, gender, education, APOE ε4, cardiovascular, hypertension, diabetes, stroke, neighborhood socioeconomic status (NSES), and AD risk genes. Latent class trajectory analyses of cognitive scores determined the form and number of classes. Random Forests (RF) classification investigated predictors of cognitive trajectories. Performance metrics (accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity) were reported.

resultsThree classes were identified. Discriminating highest from lowest classes produced the best RF performance: accuracy = 78% (1.0%), sensitivity = 75% (1.0%), and specificity = 81% (1.0%). Top ranked predictors were education, age, gender, stroke, NSES, and diabetes, APOE ε4 carrier status, and body mass index (BMI). When discriminating high from medium classes, top predictors were education, age, gender, stroke, diabetes, NSES, and BMI. When discriminating medium from the low classes, education, NSES, age, diabetes, and stroke were top predictors. DISCUSSION: The combination of latent trajectories and RF classification techniques suggested that nongenetic factors contribute more to cognitive decline than genetic factors. Education was the most relevant predictor for discrimination.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAlzheimer DiseaseApolipoprotein E4Cognitive DysfunctionDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedFemaleHumansMachine LearningMaleRisk FactorsApolipoprotein E4Cognitive declineCognitive trajectoriesMachine learningRandom forestsRisk factors

Identifiers

PMID29718387
PMCPMC7205421

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.