Health Literacy Risk in Older Adults With and Without Mild Cognitive Impairment
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
BACKGROUND: The relationship between an increasing elderly population and wide-ranging neurological conditions has led to heightened rates of cognitive function impairment. Some researchers have found that health literacy risk may be associated with cognitive impairment in older adults. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to delineate the difference in health literacy risk between older adults with mild cognitive impairment and those with normal cognitive function. METHODS: We conducted a survey study to explore the health literacy risk in older adults with and without mild cognitive impairment. Data were collected from 412 subjects between 60 and 91 years of age (260 without and 152 with mild cognitive impairment) between June and December 2016 in China. Cognitive function was measured using the Mini-Mental Status Examination, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Global Deterioration Scale, Activities of Daily Living, and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Health literacy was measured using the Chinese Citizen Health Literacy Questionnaire. RESULTS: The scores of total health literacy and its three dimensions (basic health knowledge and mind, basic skills, and health lifestyle and behavior) were lower in those with mild cognitive impairment. Older adults with normal cognitive function had adequate or marginal health literacy levels, whereas those with mild cognitive impairment had marginal or inadequate health literacy levels. Using multiple logistic regression analysis, we found that health literacy risk, education level, age, marital status, and body mass index were independent risk factors for mild cognitive impairment. DISCUSSION: These results suggest that low health literacy may be a predictor of mild cognitive impairment. Screening for lower health literacy risk should be included in multidimensional geriatric evaluation.
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 | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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