P4‐406: THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN STRESSFUL LIFE EVENTS AND COGNITIVE PERFORMANCE IN THE COMMUNITY‐DWELLING ELDERLY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stressful events have been related to human health, but their effects on cognition are controversial. This is a cross-sectional study conducted between 2015 and 2017, which is part of the ongoing cohort study “Taiwan Initiatives for Geriatric Epidemiological Research (TIGER)” started from 2011 and followed up biennially since then. A total of 605 non-demented community dwelling elders aged 65 years or older were recruited at baseline (2011-2013), and 446 elders remained in this cohort during 4-year follow-up (2015-2017). The outcomes of interests included global cognition (Montreal Cognitive Assessment Taiwanese version, MoCA-T) and domain-specific cognitions (memory, executive function, verbal ability and attention). Life events in the past year were evaluated by the Social Readjustment Rating Scale (SRRS) and were grouped into no event, one event and 1+ events. Multivariable linear regression models were performed to assess the relationships of life events with global and domain-specific cognition. Higher event frequency was associated with better verbal fluency in a dose-dependent relation (one event: β=0.03, 1+ events: β=0.25, Ptrend < 0.05). As to individual events, some positive events (e.g., vacation, holiday, change in eating habits, change in sleeping habits) were associated with better cognition; while some negative life events (e.g., sex difficulties and minor violation of the law) were associated with poor global cognition, executive function, and verbal fluency. Taken together, our study indicated that stressful life events may affect cognitive performances in different directions dependent on the nature of the events.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".