Compromised naturalistic action performance in amnestic mild cognitive impairment.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Routine naturalistic actions (NAs) are familiar activities that require the production of several actions in a particular order to achieve a specific goal, such as preparing a meal or paying bills. Given that amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) has been shown to be a risk factor for dementia, a better understanding of the cognitive processes that mediate NA performance is needed in order to facilitate efforts to promote functional autonomy in this population. METHOD: Performance of 2 highly familiar NAs, and their relationship to measures of episodic memory, semantic knowledge, and executive function was systematically investigated in a sample of healthy older adults (n = 24) and individuals with aMCI (n = 24). RESULTS: In general, measures of executive function were related to commission errors, while episodic memory was associated with the omission of supporting actions. However, both errors of omission and commission appeared to draw on a diverse array of cognitive processes. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide preliminary evidence that the cognitive correlates of NA errors may not be as process pure as previously hypothesized in neuropsychological models. A more comprehensive understanding of the cognitive underpinnings of NAs in aMCI could lead to more effective intervention programs to promote functional autonomy and delay dementia onset. Furthermore, NAs may be administered in neurocognitive assessments to identify early changes in everyday functioning and facilitate differential diagnosis between healthy aging and aMCI.
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".