MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of stress hormones on the brain and cognition: Evidence from normal to pathological aging

2011· review· en· W2097039597 on OpenAlexaff
Juliana Nery de Souza‐Talarico, Marie‐France Marin, Shireen Sindi, Sonia Lupien

Bibliographic record

VenueDementia & Neuropsychologia · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicStress Responses and Cortisol
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionPathologicalPsychologyDementiaEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceCognitive declineHormoneBrain agingAlzheimer's diseaseEpisodic memoryNeuroscienceDevelopmental psychologyInternal medicineDiseaseMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several studies have demonstrated a wide cognitive variability among aged individuals. One factor thought to be associated with this heterogeneity is exposure to chronic stress throughout life. Animal and human evidence demonstrates that glucocorticoids (GCs), the main class of stress hormones, are strongly linked to memory performance whereby elevated GC levels are associated with memory performance decline in both normal and pathological cognitive aging. Accordingly, it is believed that GCs may increase the brain's vulnerability to the effects of internal and external insults, and thus may play a role in the development of age-related cognitive disorders such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). The aim of this review article was to investigate the effects of GCs on normal and pathological cognitive aging by showing how these hormones interact with different brain structures involved in cognitive abilities, subsequently worsen memory performance, and increase the risk for developing dementia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations100
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDementia & NeuropsychologiaSame topicStress Responses and CortisolFrench-language works237,207