Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 282

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Diabetes Mellitus and Risk of Developing Alzheimer Disease: Results From the Framingham Study

Akomolafe, Abimbola, Beiser, Alexa, Meigs, James B., Au, Rhoda, Green, Robert C., Farrer, Lindsay A., Wolf, Philip A., Seshadri, Sudha·2006·Archives of Neurology
DOI 10.1001/archneur.63.11.1551
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM) could increase the risk of Alzheimer disease (AD) through several biologically plausible pathways, but the relationship between DM and the development of AD remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To compare the risk of developing AD in subjects with and without DM. DESIGN: Prospective community-based cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Framingham Study Original cohort participants who were dementia free and attended the 16th biennial examination (n = 2210 persons, 1325 women; mean age, 70 years). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Relative risk of incident AD (criteria from the National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Diseases and Stroke/Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association) associated with baseline DM (casual plasma glucose >or=200 mg/dL [>or=11.1 mmol/L] or use of insulin or a hypoglycemic drug) in overall group and within subgroups defined by apolipoprotein E genotype and plasma homocysteine levels; models were adjusted for age, sex, and cardiovascular risk factors. RESULTS: At baseline, 202 participants (9.1%) had DM. During the follow-up period (mean, 12.7 years; range, 1-20 years), 17 of 202 persons with DM (8.4%) and 220 of 2008 persons without DM (11.0%) developed AD, yielding a relative risk of 1.15 (95% confidence interval, 0.65-2.05). Among subjects without an apolipoprotein E epsilon4 allele or elevated plasma homocysteine levels, 44 of 684 persons (6.4%) developed AD; relative risk for AD comparing diabetic patients with nondiabetic patients was 2.98 (95% confidence interval, 1.06-8.39; P = .03). The effect was strongest in persons aged 75 years or older with a relative risk of 4.77 (95% confidence interval, 1.28-17.72; P = .02). CONCLUSION: Diabetes mellitus did not increase the risk of incident AD in the Framingham cohort overall; however, DM may be a risk factor for AD in the absence of other known major AD risk factors.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archneur.63.11.1551

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 282

Metadata

Authors
Akomolafe, A., Beiser, A., Meigs, J. B., Au, R., Green, R. C., Farrer, L. A., Wolf, P. A., & Seshadri, S.
Venue
Archives of Neurology
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2006-11-01
Volume
63
Issue
11
Pages
1551
ISSN
0003-9942 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1001/archneur.63.11.1551
OpenAlex
W2171236187
Cited by
282
References
13
FWCI
9.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.