Glucose regulation is associated with attentional control performances in nondiabetic older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Less efficient glucose regulation, the ability to metabolize glucose, has been associated with poorer cognitive performances in older individuals not meeting criteria for type 2 diabetes ( Messier, Tsiakas, Gagnon, & Desrochers, 2010 ). Yet, the influence of glucose regulation on attentional functions, which are sensitive to aging, is still unclear. The present study examined the relationship between glucose regulation and performances on attentional tasks in nondiabetic older adults. Twenty-two participants (60 years and older) were tested on neuropsychological tests of attention (Trail Making test, modified Stroop test) and on a computerized dual task, after receiving a 50-g glucose drink. Participants with the worse glucose regulation committed more errors on the switching condition of the modified Stroop test (p < .05) and tended to make more errors in divided-attention trials of the computerized dual task (p = .05). Altogether, these results suggest that glucose regulation may transiently influence performances of metabolically healthy older adults on tasks requiring switching attention.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".