MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021798152 · doi:10.1177/0091415020917681

Positive, but Not Negative, Self-Perceptions of Aging Predict Cognitive Function Among Older Adults

2020· article· en· W3021798152 on OpenAlexaff
Kellie E. Brown, Jeehoon Kim, Tara L. Stewart, Erika K. Fulton, Anna McCarrey

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Aging and Human Development · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionSuccessful agingPsychologyNeuropsychologyCognitive agingGerontologyPerceptionCognitive declineClinical psychologyLongevityMedicineDementiaPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Self-perceptions of aging (SPA) refer to attitudes about one’s aging process and are linked to physical health and longevity. How SPA correlates with cognitive function in older adulthood is less well known. 136 older adults were administered a multifaceted SPA measure, The Brief Ageing Perceptions Questionnaire (B-APQ), in addition to a demographic form and a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Positive and negative subscales of the B-APQ were correlated with aspects of cognitive function. Regression analyses revealed that only the positive B-APQ subscales predicted mental status ( β = .19, p < .05), short-delay memory ( β = .16, p < .05), processing speed ( β = −.21, p < .05), and two measures of executive function ( β = −.21, p < .01; β = .18, p < .05). This is the first study to demonstrate that positive dimensions of SPA relate to cognitive function in older adulthood.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Aging and Human DevelopmentSame topicAging and Gerontology ResearchFrench-language works237,207