Plasma concentrations of vitamin B<sub>12</sub> and folate and global cognitive function in an older population: cross-sectional findings from The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The uncertainty surrounding high intakes of folic acid and associations with cognitive decline in older adults with low vitamin B12 status has been an obstacle to mandatory folic acid fortification for many years. We estimated the prevalence of combinations of low/normal/high vitamin B12 and folate status and compared associations with global cognitive function using two approaches, of individuals in a population-based study of those aged ≥50 years in the Republic of Ireland. Cross-sectional data from 3781 men and women from Wave 1 of The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing were analysed. Global cognitive function was assessed by the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Prevalence estimates for combinations of vitamin B12 (plasma vitamin B12 < or ≥258 pmol/l) and folate (plasma folate ≤ or >45·3 nmol/l) concentrations were generated. Negative binomial regression models were used to investigate the associations of vitamin B12 and folate status with global cognitive function. Of the participants, 1·5 % (n 51) had low vitamin B12 (<258 pmol/l) and high folate (>45·3 nmol/l) status. Global cognitive performance was not significantly reduced in these individuals when compared with those with normal status for both B-vitamins (n 2433). Those with normal vitamin B12/high folate status (7·6 %) had better cognitive performance (MMSE: incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0·82, 95 % CI 0·68, 0·99; P = 0·043, MoCA: IRR 0·89, 95 % CI 0·80, 0·99; P = 0·025). We demonstrated that high folate status was not associated with lower cognitive scores in older adults with low vitamin B12 status. These findings provide important safety information that could guide fortification policy recommendations in Europe.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".