P2‐316: Executive functions and occupational performance in Brazilian older adults with mild cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Executive functions (EF) are complex cognitive abilities that enable an individual to perform complex tasks. Impairment on EF is associated with the need for care, faster progression to dementia and also underlies poor functional achievement. Occupational performance refers to the ability to choose, organize and satisfactorily perform relevant daily activities involving self-care, leisure and productivity. The aim of this study is to investigate the correlation between EF and occupational performance in Brazilian older adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI). 19 older adults (mean age 74.1 ± 6.2 years, 13 females,10 married, 9.5 ± 4.6 years of formal education) with MCI according to the Mayo Clinic criteria (63% with amnestic MCI) were assessed using the 25-item Executive Interview (EXIT25), Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) and Cambridge Cognitive Test (CAMCOG). Spearman's correlation test was used in the analysis. Twelve patients (63.2%) had a CDR score of 0.50 and six patients (31. 6%) had a CDR score of 0.0. Mean CAMCOG scores were 91.27 ± 7.9 and mean EXIT-25 scores were 6.68 ± 4.2. The perception of ability to perform activities of the daily living (COPM) was correlated with the EXIT-25 scores (rs = -0.505, P = 0.03). The correlation between CAMCOG and EXIT-25 scores was 0.730 (P = 0.002). Preliminary results suggest that the perception about occupational performance (as measured through the COPM) is influenced by executive dysfunction, despite of the dissimilar structure of the instruments used to measure these domains. As expected, executive functions were strongly correlated with global cognitive performance (CAMCOG).
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".