From 36f33c898127c33410eaca4ba66ab65fe7e04efd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Teleo Agents Date: Sat, 9 May 2026 04:38:48 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] substantive-fix: address reviewer feedback (confidence_miscalibration) --- ...with-vascular-dementia-showing-strongest-association.md | 7 +------ 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/domains/health/loneliness-independently-increases-dementia-risk-19-31-percent-after-depression-adjustment-with-vascular-dementia-showing-strongest-association.md b/domains/health/loneliness-independently-increases-dementia-risk-19-31-percent-after-depression-adjustment-with-vascular-dementia-showing-strongest-association.md index 7cf26dd63..8a994dba1 100644 --- a/domains/health/loneliness-independently-increases-dementia-risk-19-31-percent-after-depression-adjustment-with-vascular-dementia-showing-strongest-association.md +++ b/domains/health/loneliness-independently-increases-dementia-risk-19-31-percent-after-depression-adjustment-with-vascular-dementia-showing-strongest-association.md @@ -1,10 +1,5 @@ ```markdown -## The Claim (current version) - - ## Challenging Evidence - **Source:** Burden of Proof study group, PMC12726400, 41 studies - -Burden of Proof methodology (designed to correct for publication bias and systematic biases in observational studies) finds social isolation → dementia association has mean RR 1.29 (95% UI 0.98–1.71) — confidence interval CROSSES 1.0, classifying this as 'possible but uncertain' association. Only 'lack of social activity' sub-measure shows CI that does not cross null (RR 1.34, 95% UI 1.05–1.71). The BoP methodology's greater conservatism compared to standard meta-analyses explains the divergence from the HR 1.189 finding. +Burden of Proof methodology (designed to correct for publication bias and systematic biases in observational studies) finds social isolation → dementia association has mean RR 1.29 (95% UI 0.98–1.71) — this confidence interval CROSSES 1.0, classifying this as a 'possible but uncertain' association. Only the 'lack of social activity' sub-measure shows a confidence interval that does not cross the null (RR 1.34, 95% UI 1.05–1.71). The BoP methodology's greater conservatism compared to standard meta-analyses explains the divergence from the HR 1.189 finding, suggesting the overall association is less certain than previously estimated. ``` \ No newline at end of file