Cognitive decline in Alzheimer disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess effects of quality of life (QOL), spirituality, and religiosity on rate of progression of cognitive decline in Alzheimer disease (AD). METHODS: In this longitudinal study, we recruited 70 patients with probable AD. The Mini-Mental State Examination was used to monitor the rate of cognitive decline. Religiosity and spirituality were measured using standardized scales that assess spirituality, religiosity, and organizational and private religious practices. We conducted a simultaneous multiple linear regression analysis for factors contributing to rate of cognitive decline. RESULTS: After controlling for baseline level of cognition, age, sex, and education, a slower rate of cognitive decline was associated with higher levels of spirituality (p < 0.05) and private religious practices (p < 0.005). These variables accounted for 17% of the total variance [F(11,58) = 2.24, p < 0.05]. There was no correlation between rate of cognitive decline and QOL. CONCLUSION: Higher levels of spirituality and private religious practices, but not quality of life, are associated with slower progression of Alzheimer disease.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".