Cognition and adaptive functioning in older people attending drug and alcohol services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Substance use disorders in older adults are expected to increase dramatically in the coming years. Given the increased susceptibility to cognitive deficits in older substance users (defined here as aged 50+ years due to the accelerated health decline observed in this population), it is important to consider the functional correlates of cognitive impairment in these older adults. This study details the cognitive status of older individuals attending outpatient drug and alcohol (D&A) treatment services and seeks to determine of the association of cognitive impairment to self-reported daily functioning. METHODS: Ninety nine clients aged 50 years or over attending outpatient D&A treatment services in Sydney, Australia participated. Cognition was assessed using the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination - Revised (ACE-R). Recent substance use (Australian Treatment Outcome Profile), physical and mental health (SF12, Geriatric Depression Scale), social isolation (Lubben Social Network Scale), and activities of daily living (Bayer ADL Scale) were also assessed. RESULTS: Nearly two-thirds of participants screened positive for cognitive impairment on the ACE-R; 41% and 65% of clients met the cut-off scores for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and more severe cognitive impairment, respectively. Self-reported seizure history was a predictor of cognitive impairment. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that cognitive impairment in this group is common. The assessment of cognitive status for this older group of patients should not only include the identification of cognitive impairment but also encompass mental health and social functioning. A greater understanding of the needs of this cohort will also enable better co-ordination with other health and welfare services tailored to this population.
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".