Morning salivary cortisol and cognitive function in mid-life: evidence from a population-based birth cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The hormone 'cortisol' has been associated with cognitive deficits in older ages, and also with childhood cognition. The extent to which the associations of cortisol with cognitive deficits in later life reflect associations with childhood cognition ability is unclear. This study aimed to assess associations between adult cortisol levels and subsequent cognitive functions, while considering childhood cognition and other lifetime covariates. METHOD: Data are from the 1958 British Birth Cohort. Two morning salivary cortisol samples were obtained at 45 years: 45 min after waking (t1) and 3 h later (t2). Standardized tests assessing immediate and delayed verbal memory, verbal fluency and speed of processing were administered at 50 years. Information on cortisol, cognitive outcomes and covariates [e.g., birthweight, lifetime socio-economic position (SEP), education, smoking and drinking habits, body mass index (BMI), menopausal status, and depression/anxiety] was obtained for 4655 participants. RESULTS: Worse immediate and delayed verbal memory and verbal fluency at 50 years were predicted by elevated t2 cortisol at 45 years. For instance, for 1 standard deviation (s.d.) increase in t2 cortisol, individuals scored -0.05 s.d. lower on verbal memory and fluency tests. Childhood cognition explained about 30% of these associations, but associations with adult cognition remained. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that higher cortisol levels in late morning at 45 years are associated with poorer verbal memory and fluency at 50 years, with a contribution from childhood cognition to these associations.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".