The Hierarchy of Functional Loss Associated With Cognitive Decline in Older Persons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We studied a representative cohort of community-dwelling elderly persons to (i) examine the relationship between the loss of specific functional activities and cognitive status at the time of these losses, (ii) compare the cognitive status of participants who have and have not lost independence in these functional activities, and (iii) determine whether a hierarchical scale of functional loss is associated with declining cognitive status. METHODS: A cohort of 5874 community-dwelling persons aged 65 years and older from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging I and II were analyzed. At baseline and 5 years later, cognitive status with the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MS) and functional status with 14 Older American Resources and Services (OARS) items were measured. For each OARS functional item, the mean 3MS scores for persons who lost independence during the 5-year period versus those who did not were compared. RESULTS: For each functional item, the 5-year decline in 3MS scores of persons who lost independence were significantly greater than those who remained independent (e.g., ability to do finances), with an 18-point decline for those who lost independence and a 2-point decline for those who retained independence. A hierarchy of functional items existed, with instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) (e.g., shopping, banking, and cooking) being lost at higher cognitive scores than basic ADL items (e.g., eating, dressing, and walking), although there was some overlap. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first prospective study using a large representative cohort of elderly persons to demonstrate that progressive cognitive decline is associated with a specific pattern of loss of functional tasks. Clear cognitive thresholds at which development of dependency in OARS functional items occurred. By providing estimates of the cognitive status of persons at the time at which they developed dependency in specific functional items, a natural hierarchy of functional loss associated with cognitive decline emerged. For caregivers, clinicians, and health policy makers, this information can help anticipate the pattern of functional decline and the subsequent care needs of persons with declining cognition, potentially improving the quality of life of these persons and their caregivers and playing an important part in health care planning.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".