Dietary Vitamin K Intake Is Associated with Cognition and Behaviour among Geriatric Patients: The CLIP Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our objective was to determine whether dietary vitamin K intake was associated with cognition and behavior among older adults. 192 consecutive participants ≥65 years, recruited in the cross-sectional CLIP (Cognition and LIPophilic vitamins) study, were separated into two groups according to the tertiles of dietary phylloquinone intake (i.e., lowest third below 207 µg/day versus the other two thirds combined). Daily dietary phylloquinone intake was estimated from 50-item interviewer-administered food frequency questionnaire. Cognition was assessed with Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE); behaviour with Frontotemporal Behavioral Rating Scale (FBRS). Age, gender, social problems, education, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, history of stroke, use vitamin K antagonists, inadequate fatty fish intake, serum thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), vitamin B12, albumin, and estimated glomerular filtration rate were used as confounders. Compared to participants in the lowest third of dietary phylloquinone intake (n = 64), those with higher intake had higher (i.e., better) mean MMSE score (22.0 ± 5.7 versus 19.9 ± 6.2, p = 0.024) and lower (i.e., better) FBRS score (1.5 ± 1.2 versus 1.9 ± 1.3, p = 0.042). In multivariate linear regressions, log dietary phylloquinone intake was positively associated with MMSE score (adjusted β = 1.66, p = 0.013) and inversely associated with FBRS score (adjusted β = -0.33, p = 0.037). Specifically, log dietary phylloquinone intake correlated negatively with FBRS subscore of physical neglect (r = -0.24, p = 0.001). Higher dietary phylloquinone intake was associated with better cognition and behavior among older adults.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".