Cognitive Activities and Instrumental Activity of Daily Living in Older Adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: This study aimed to identify differences in the implementation of cognitive activities and instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) between healthy individuals and subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). METHODS: The study included 2,498 cognitively healthy subjects (mean age, 71.2 ± 5.1 years) and 809 MCI subjects (mean age, 71.8 ± 5.4 years). The subjects were interviewed regarding their participation in cognitive activities and the implementation of IADLs. RESULTS: We found a significant association between participation in any cognitive activities (p < 0.001), using a bus or a train (p < 0.001), and MCI. After adjusting for covariates, cognitive activity of any type remained significantly associated with MCI (p < 0.005) but not with the implementation of IADLs. CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed that greater participation in cognitive activity was associated with lower odds of MCI. Participation in cognitive activities may reflect differences between healthy and MCI subjects. To clarify the causal relationship between cognitive activities and MCI, further studies are required.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".