Prognostic Factors for Functional Independence in Older Adults With Mild Dementia: Results From the Canadian Study of Health and Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the prevalence of and prognostic factors for functional independence in personal activities of daily living in a population-based sample of 90 seniors with mild dementia from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging. Personal activities of daily living were assessed from the report of proxy respondents at baseline and at the 5-year follow-up (or retrospectively if death had occurred). Sixteen (17.8% of the total group of 90) subjects maintained their personal activities of daily living independence over the full 5-year period or up to 3 months before death (15.1% if the four subjects reclassified as not demented at the second wave are excluded). An age of 75-84 years (vs. those 65-74 years of age and 85+ years of age; odds ratio 12.9, 95% confidence interval 2.7, 112.7), the absence of gait-balance-movement problems (odds ratio 5.2, 95% confidence interval 1.3, 25.8), the presence of extrapyramidal signs (odds ratio 9.5), and fewer years of formal education (odds ratio 3.6) were favorable prognostic factors in our multivariate modeling. An absence of sensory problems was a statistically significant favorable prognostic factor in bivariate analysis. Prior studies on the time required for patients with dementia to progress to functional milestones used clinic-based samples. Our findings, which have potential public health implications, need to be confirmed and expanded upon.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".