Cognitive reserve attenuates age-related cognitive decline in the context of putatively accelerated brain ageing in schizophrenia-spectrum disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In schizophrenia, relative stability in the magnitude of cognitive deficits across age and illness duration is inconsistent with the evidence of accelerated deterioration in brain regions known to support these functions. These discrepant brain-cognition outcomes may be explained by variability in cognitive reserve (CR), which in neurological disorders has been shown to buffer against brain pathology and minimize its impact on cognitive or clinical indicators of illness. METHODS: Age-related change in fluid reasoning, working memory and frontal brain volume, area and thickness were mapped using regression analysis in 214 individuals with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and 168 healthy controls. In patients, these changes were modelled as a function of CR. RESULTS: Patients showed exaggerated age-related decline in brain structure, but not fluid reasoning compared to controls. In the patient group, no moderation of age-related brain structural change by CR was evident. However, age-related cognitive change was moderated by CR, such that only patients with low CR showed evidence of exaggerated fluid reasoning decline that paralleled the exaggerated age-related deterioration of underpinning brain structures seen in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: In schizophrenia-spectrum illness, CR may negate ageing effects on fluid reasoning by buffering against pathologically exaggerated structural brain deterioration through some form of compensation. CR may represent an important modifier that could explain inconsistencies in brain structure - cognition outcomes in the extant literature.
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 | 0.000 | 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".