A-13 * The Effects of Serum Vitamin D Levels on Cognition in a Geriatric Sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To examine the impact Vitamin D has on cognition in the geriatric population. Method: Archival participant data from the Health First Aging Institute was utilized for this study. For the first part of the study, participant test scores on a general measure of neurocognitive functioning (MoCA) were correlated with Vitamin D levels from 300 older adults with a mean age of 80.61. For the second part of the study, participant test scores on the MoCA were compared pre- and post-treatment of low Vitamin D levels from 39 older adults with a mean age of 81.05. All participants underwent a medical evaluation, including Vitamin D lab-work and MoCA administration to obtain a baseline measure of their general neurocognitive functioning. In the second part of the study, an additional MoCA was administered after treatment for Vitamin D deficiency, as well as additional lab-work to verify treatment compliance. Participants with kidney problems, diabetes, and epilepsy were excluded from the study due to the impact these conditions have on Vitamin D concentrations. Results: There was a significant positive correlation between Vitamin D level and cognition, r(298) = .221, p < .0005., indicating higher scores on the MoCA were associated with higher levels of Vitamin D. Further, the paired samples t-test comparing participant test scores on the MoCA pre- and post-treatment of low Vitamin D levels yielded no significant results. Conclusion(s): While higher levels of Vitamin D have a positive impact on cognition, Vitamin D supplementation did not improve cognition in patients diagnosed with Vitamin D deficiency.
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 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".