Does Day Length Affect Cognitive Performance in Memory Clinic Patients?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether day length affects cognitive performance in rural and remote memory clinic patients. METHODS: A rural and remote memory clinic in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan provided an opportunity to examine how cognitive performance on the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE) is influenced by day length. Saskatchewan is an ideal location to test this association as day length varies greatly both seasonally and geographically. Following an initial assessment by the Rural and Remote Memory Clinic (RRMC) team in Saskatoon, patient follow-up appointments were performed either in-person or via telehealth videoconference. At each follow-up appointment the clinic neurologist administered the MMSE. The relationship between day length and MMSE scores at the six-week follow-up appointment was analyzed in 154 patients. The mean daily temperature was controlled for in the analysis. Bivariate correlate and linear regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: There was no significant association between MMSE scores and either minutes of day length or mean daily temperature. CONCLUSION: Day length does not appear to have significant effect on cognitive performance of rural and remote memory clinic patients.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".