Domestic Activities Associated With a Decreased Risk of Cognitive Disorders: Results of the “Fréle” Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Previous cohorts studied the association of various types of physical activities with the incidence of cognitive disorders. The objective of this work was to analyze the association of leisure, domestic and professional physical activities with mild and moderate cognitive disorders in older people living in the community. Methods: We used retrospective data from the “FRéLE” (FRagilité: étude Longitudinale de ses Expressions) a longitudinal and observational study. Data collected included socio-demographic variables, lifestyle and health status. Cognitive disorders were assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Two cut-offs of MoCA were used to analyze mild and moderate cognitive disorders. Physical activity was assessed by the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE) structured in three sections: leisure, household, and professional activities. Spline and logistic regression models were used to estimate the risk of cognitive disorders. Results: At baseline, 428 participants (for study of mild disorders) and 1,271 participants (for study of moderate disorders) without cognitive disorders were included in the analysis. The mean ages were 74 and 78 years, respectively. After a 2-year follow-up, we found mild cognitive disorders in 154 participants (36%) and 71 cases of moderate cognitive disorders (5.6%). In multi-adjusted logistic models, domestic activities were associated with cognitive disorders, but not leisure and professional activities. Conclusion: We found an inverse relation between domestic sub-score and cognitive disorders defined by MoCA < 18. With a specific questionnaire and quantitative information on the type of activities, this study contributed to the debate on the beneficial effects of physical activity on cognition.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".