Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Improvements in health and social care for people with intellectual disability have led to a dramatic increase in the life expectancy of this population, resulting in a large and growing number of older adults with intellectual disability. They are at risk of age-related mental disorders such as dementia and continue to present with high rates of mental illness. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent research with older adults with intellectual disability has included physical health issues that may affect mental well being, and biological and clinical features of dementia in people with Down syndrome. Two key clinical trials of memantine and antioxidants for dementia in Down syndrome showed that these treatment options were ineffective in the short term. Other research focussed on environmental and psychosocial issues (including carer issues) and end-of-life care. SUMMARY: Improved mental well being requires effective management of mental illness and co-morbid physical health problems as well as consideration of environmental and social issues. Biological research has identified potential treatments for age-related decline, which has led to the development of medication trials. Despite disappointing results, two recent medication trials showed that randomized controlled trials are feasible in older people with intellectual disabilities - a group who are often excluded from trials.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".