Global Cognition Modified the Longitudinal Relationship Between Anemia and Depression in Old Age: The IMIAS Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: We examined the longitudinal relationships between hemoglobin concentrations or the severity of anemia and depression and whether baseline cognitive function modifies these longitudinal relationships over 4 years of follow-up. Methods: A total of 1608 community-dwelling older adults from the International Mobility in Aging Study (IMIAS) aged 65 to 74 years were recruited in Natal (Brazil), Manizales (Colombia), Kingston (Ontario, Canada), and Saint-Hyacinthe (Quebec, Canada). The study outcome was depression, defined by a score of 16 or over in the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). Longitudinal associations over four years follow-up were examined using generalized estimating equations. Models reported were either unadjusted and adjusted for research sites, alcohol drinking status, body mass index, chronic conditions, activities of daily life disabilities, and polypharmacy. Results: Longuitinal relationships suggested an evidence of multiplicative interaction by baseline global cognition in which 1g/dL increase in hemoglobin concentrations there was a significant reduction in the risk of depression with a stronger effect among participants with good cognitive function (Odds Ratio (OR)=0.85, 95% CI: 0.78-0.92) compared to those with poor cognition (OR=0.89, 95% CI: 0.80-0.97). Anemia and poor cognition at baseline were associated with an increased risk of depression over 4 years of follow-up (OR=5.80, 95% CI: 1.84-18.23). Global cognition was an effect modifier of the longitudinal association between the severity of anemia and depression. Conclusion: In international samples of older adults, hemoglobin concentrations, as well as the severity of anemia, were independent risk factors for depression and these associations differed by global cognitive function.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".