Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Mood, baseline functioning, and cognitive abilities as well as psychotropic medications may contribute to mortality in adults with and without Down Syndrome (DS). Methods. Population-based (nonclinical), community-dwelling adults with intellectual disabilities (IDs) were recruited between 1995 and 2000, assessed individually for 1-4 times, and then followed by yearly phone calls. Results. 360 participants (116 with DS and 244 without DS) were followed for an average of 12.9 years (range 0-16.1 years as of July 2011). 108 people died during the course of the followup, 65 males (31.9% of all male participants) and 43 females (27.6% of all female participants). Cox proportional hazards modeling showed that baseline practical skills, seizures, anticonvulsant use, depressive symptoms, and cognitive decline over the first six years all significantly contributed to mortality, as did a diagnosis of DS, male gender, and higher age at study entry. Analysis stratified by DS showed interesting differences in mortality predictors. Conclusion. Although adults with DS have had considerable improvements in life expectancy over time, they are still disadvantaged compared to adults with ID without DS. Recognition of potentially modifiable factors such as depression may decrease this risk.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".