ArticleBMC infectious diseases2026
Multi-dimensional risk prediction and genetic architecture of aspiration pneumonia: a population-based analysis.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAspiration pneumonia represents a significant but understudied cause of morbidity and mortality, particularly among aging populations with neurological comorbidities. Current risk stratification tools rely on single-dimensional clinical data, limiting their predictive accuracy and population health utility. This study aimed to develop comprehensive risk prediction models and identify genetic determinants of aspiration pneumonia using integrated epidemiological, computational, and genomic approaches.
methodsWe conducted a nested case-control study within the UK Biobank (n = 501,968), identifying 3,659 aspiration pneumonia cases (ICD-10 J69.0) and selecting 1:4 controls initially matched on age, sex, and assessment center. Propensity scores were estimated using logistic regression based on demographic, lifestyle, functional, biomarker, and comorbidity variables. A 1:4 nearest-neighbor propensity score matching without replacement was then performed using a caliper of 0.2 standard deviations of the logit of the propensity score. We performed multivariable logistic regression and sensitivity analyses for comorbidity profiling, machine-learning risk prediction with model interpretation, and genome-wide association analysis using REGENIE.
resultsNeurological conditions were the strongest risk factors, including dysphagia (OR 11.71, 95% CI 10.52-13.03; P < 0.001), Parkinson's disease (OR 10.94, 95% CI 9.20-13.02; P < 0.001), and dementia (OR 9.45, 95% CI 8.35-10.69; P < 0.001). In joint comorbidity models, dysphagia, stroke, Parkinson's disease, and dementia remained independently associated with aspiration pneumonia. The LightGBM model showed high discrimination (AUC 0.867, 95% CI 0.854-0.880) with balanced sensitivity (75.3%) and specificity (78.9%). GWAS identified genome-wide significant signals at the APOE locus, with rs429358 as the lead variant (P = 2.29e-13; OR 2.22, 95% CI 2.09-2.36).
conclusionsThis population-based analysis shows that aspiration pneumonia is closely associated with neurological morbidity, functional vulnerability, inflammatory markers, and an APOE-centered genetic signal. The prediction model demonstrated strong discriminative performance. Because dementia-excluded and comorbidity-stratified genotype-level analyses were not performed, the APOE association should be interpreted as a neurodegeneration-related susceptibility signal rather than definitive evidence of an effect independent of dementia. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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 Socratic graph.