The association between cognitive function and mortality pertained to specific but not general measures of cognitive function when health factors were considered
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Smits CH, Deeg DJ, Kriegsman DM, et al. Cognitive functioning and health as determinants of mortality in an older population. Am J Epidemiol1999 Nov 1; 150 : 978 –86. [OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] QUESTIONS: In older people, does health influence the ability of cognitive functioning to predict mortality? Is mortality associated with general or specific measures of cognitive function? Population based cohort study of participants in the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam with a mean 3.3 years of follow up. 11 municipalities in 3 culturally distinct geographic areas of the Netherlands. 2380 participants who were 55–85 years of age (65% ≥65 y of age, 51% women) in a random sample stratified by age and sex according to expected mortality after 5 years. General cognitive functioning (Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE]); information processing speed (Coding Task adapted from the … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DAmerican%2BJournal%2Bof%2BEpidemiology%26rft.stitle%253DAm%2BJ%2BEpidemiol%26rft.aulast%253DSmits%26rft.auinit1%253DC.%2BH.%2BM.%26rft.volume%253D150%26rft.issue%253D9%26rft.spage%253D978%26rft.epage%253D986%26rft.atitle%253DCognitive%2BFunctioning%2Band%2BHealth%2Bas%2BDeterminants%2Bof%2BMortality%2Bin%2Ban%2BOlder%2BPopulation%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1093%252Foxfordjournals.aje.a010107%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F10547144%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a010107&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10547144&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmental%2F3%2F2%2F60.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000083468000011&link_type=ISI
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 | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".