Age-Related Eye Disease and Participation in Cognitive Activities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies have found a benefit to living a cognitively active life in older age. Our goal was to quantify participation in cognitively stimulating activities in adults with and without age-related eye disease. We conducted a cross-sectional hospital-based study in Montreal, Canada of older adults (n = 303) having either age-related macular degeneration (AMD) (n = 96), glaucoma (n = 93), or normal vision (n = 114). To be eligible, the AMD group had to have bilateral late stage AMD with a better eye visual acuity of 20/30 or worse. The glaucoma group had to have a diagnosis of bilateral primary open-angle glaucoma with visual field mean deviation < = -4 dB in their better eye. Further inclusion criteria included age ≥ 65 and a Mini-Mental State Exam Blind score ≥ 10. Cognitive activities were measured using the Victoria Longitudinal Study Activity Questionnaire. Linear regression was used. Patients with AMD (β = -4.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) -6.0, -2.4) and glaucoma (β = -1.8, 95% CI -3.3, -0.3) participated in fewer cognitive activities per month compared to those with normal vision after adjusting for age, sex, education, diabetes, number of comorbidities, cognition, and cataract. People with AMD and glaucoma participated in fewer cognitive activities, which could put them at risk for future cognitive impairment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".