Association between Alcohol Intake and Domain-Specific Cognitive Function in Older Women
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Moderate levels of alcohol intake may be associated with better cognitive function; however, this relationship may vary between cognitive domains. Women, aged 65-80 years, enrolled in the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) randomized clinical trials of hormone therapy, underwent annual standardized testing for global cognitive function through the ancillary WHI Memory Study (average follow-up of 4.5 years) and domain-specific cognitive function through the WHI Study of Cognitive Aging (average follow-up of 1.7 years). Compared to nondrinkers, women reporting moderate levels of alcohol intake (<or=3 drinks per day) performed better on a measure of global cognitive function. Women reporting any alcohol intake also performed better on tests of verbal knowledge, verbal fluency, figural memory, verbal memory, attention and working memory, and motor speed (all p < 0.05), but not spatial ability (p = 0.36). After covariate adjustment, mean scores were higher among women reporting >or=1 drink/day by 5.7% for verbal knowledge (p < 0.001) and by 5.7% for phonemic fluency (p = 0.004), compared to never-drinkers. Moderate levels of alcohol intake are associated with somewhat better cognition, which may be expressed most strongly in functions related to verbal knowledge and phonemic fluency. However, our observational study cannot rule out confounding associations with unmeasured factors.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it