MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2411349518 · doi:10.1024/1662-9647/a000138

Education, Occupational Class, and Cognitive Decline in Preclinical Dementia

2016· article· en· W2411349518 on OpenAlexaff
Dorina Cadar, Andrea M. Piccinin, Scott M. Hofer, Boo Johansson, Graciela Muñiz‐Terrera

Bibliographic record

VenueGeroPsych · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaCognitive declineCognitive reserveCognitionMedicineGerontologyEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performancePsychologyClinical psychologyCognitive impairmentPsychiatryDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. We investigated education and occupational influences as markers of cognitive reserve in relation to cognitive performance and decline on multiple fluid and crystallized abilities in preclinical dementia. From the total sample of 702 participants stemming from the OCTO-Twin Study (Sweden), aged 80+ at baseline in 1992–1993, only those who developed dementia during the study period (N = 127) were included in these analyses. Random effects models were used to examine the level of performance at the time of dementia diagnosis and the rates of decline prior to diagnosis. The results demonstrated that both fluid and crystallized abilities decline in preclinical stages, and that education and occupational class have independent moderating roles on the cognitive performance at the time of diagnosis, but not on the rates of decline.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.374 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeroPsychSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207