Frailty Phenotype and Neuropsychological Test Performance: A Preliminary Analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Frailty is a common problem that affects adults older than 65 years. Correlations between the frailty phenotype and neuropsychological impairment have not been thoroughly researched. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between frailty phenotype, neuropsychological screening test results, and neuropsychological domains known to characterize patients with mild cognitive impairment and dementia. METHODS: This retrospective medical record analysis consisted of ambulatory patients aged 65 years or older seen in an outpatient geriatric practice. All patients were assessed with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). A portion of those patients also underwent a comprehensive neuropsychological evaluation that assessed executive control, naming/lexical access, and declarative memory expressed as 3 neuropsychological index scores. Frailty phenotype was determined using criteria by Fried et al. RESULTS: Simple correlation found that lower MoCA test scores were associated with a higher level of frailty (r=-0.34, P<.032). Regression analyses found that greater frailty was associated with worse performance on tests that assessed executive control and working memory (backward digit span; r2=0.267; β=-0.517; P<.011) and delayed recognition memory (r2=0.207; β=-0.455; P<.025). CONCLUSION: A correlation was found between frailty and neuropsychological impairment, which suggests that frailty may be a potential indicator for the emergence of mild cognitive impairment and dementia.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it