Cognitive decline and slower reaction time in elderly individuals with mild cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The relationship between declining performance, as measured by changes in reaction time, and declining cognitive function has not been critically studied. The aim of the present study was to investigate the association between reaction time during a task and cognitive ability in elderly Taiwanese individuals. METHODS: Patients aged 65 years or older with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) (n = 33) and Alzheimer's disease (n = 26) were recruited from the neurology clinic of a regional hospital in southern Taiwan. In addition, 28 healthy controls aged 65 years or older were recruited from the community. The cognitive performance of the study participants was assessed using the Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument (CASI). A computer-administered simple reaction time (SRT) task and a flanker reaction time (FRT) task were administered to assess participants' cognitive function. A non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to compare CASI scores, SRT, and FRT among the three groups. anova was also used to compare CASI scores, inverse-transformed SRT, and inverse-transformed FRT among the three groups, with adjustment for age and years of education. Additionally, Pearson's partial correlation coefficients were used to assess the association of CASI scores with inverse-transformed SRT, and inverse-transformed FRT within each of the three groups. RESULTS: Significant differences in CASI scores, SRT, and FRT were found between the Alzheimer's disease group and the other two groups, either with or without adjustment for age or education. The reaction time of patients with Alzheimer's disease was significantly slower than the other two groups. Moreover, significant correlation between CASI and FRT was found in patients with MCI. CONCLUSION: Altered performance in a speed task was observed in patients with MCI. The FRT task should further be explored for its role as a marker for cognitive decline in elderly individuals, particularly in those with MCI.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".