Association between cognitive function and life-space mobility in older adults: results from the FRéLE longitudinal study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies show conflicting results regarding the association between cognition and life-space mobility, and little is known regarding the mediators and moderators of the association. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between cognition and life-space mobility in older adults, as well as the intervening variables modifying the relationship. METHODS: Community-dwelling older adults aged 65 years and older (N = 1643) were assessed at three time points over a period of 2 years. Growth mixture models with mediation and moderation analysis were utilised to investigate association between cognitive function and life-space mobility. The potential mediators and moderators were depressive symptoms, locus of control, gait speed and grip strength. Analysis was controlled for age, sex, education, annual income, number of chronic illnesses, and living site. RESULTS: The direct association between initial scores of cognitive function and life-space was mediated by initial scores of depressive symptoms and gait speed, and moderated by initial scores of grip strength. No direct association between change in cognitive function and change in life-space mobility was found; the scores were mediated by change in depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the relationship between change in cognitive function and life-space mobility in older adults is not well-defined over an observation period of 2 years.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".