Association of cognitive activity and neurocognitive function in blacks and whites with HIV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Older persons with HIV are at risk for impaired cognition, yet there is limited information on modifiable factors associated with neurocognitive function in this group. DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional observational study of cognitive activities and neurocognitive function. METHODS: We examined the relation between frequency of cognitive activity and current neurocognitive performance in 176 older persons with HIV [70% African American, 76% men; mean age = 58.7 (SD = 5.5); mean education = 13.2 (SD = 2.8)]. RESULTS: In linear regression models adjusted for demographic variables, we found that higher frequency of cognitive activity was associated with better cognition in global cognition, semantic memory, and perceptual speed. Subsequent models that examined the role of race demonstrated that the association was significant only among Blacks for global cognition, episodic memory, working memory, and perceptual speed (interaction of cognitive activity by race: Estimate range = 0.38-0.55; all P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Greater frequency of cognitive activity is associated with better neurocognitive function in older persons with HIV, particularly older Blacks. Longitudinal studies are needed to assess the relation of cognitive activity to change in neurocognitive function in older persons with HIV.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".