Anxiety and Depression as Longitudinal Predictors of Mild Cognitive Impairment in Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Few studies have dealt with the potential correlation between anxiety, depression, and cognitive impairment in community-dwelling older adults. METHOD: This longitudinal study was conducted in the city of Montreal, Canada, with 352 older adults aged 55 years or more. The participants were interviewed at baseline and again 2 years later. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score was estimated and compared between the 2 time points, the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) was used to assess major depression and anxiety, and the K10 measured high psychological distress. Likewise, major depression, anxiety disorders, and psychological distress were evaluated at the 2 study time points. RESULTS: In older adults with a diagnosis of depression or anxiety at baseline, no significant reduction in the MoCA score indicating deterioration in cognitive function was found 2 years later. Nevertheless, in individuals with a high level of psychological distress at baseline, there was a significant reduction in MoCA scores 2 years later, indicating deterioration in cognition. The findings of the present study suggest that a high level of psychological distress in addition to environmental factors may constitute important predictors for cognitive health.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".