Cognitive impairment and treatment outcomes amongst people attending an alcohol intervention service for those aged 50+
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose No studies have evaluated the relationship between cognitive impairment and alcohol treatment outcomes amongst older drinkers. This study aims to explore the extent of cognitive impairment amongst older adults seeking alcohol treatment and examine the relationship between cognitive impairment, treatment retention and alcohol use following treatment. Design/methodology/approach The study used data from the Drink Wise Age Well programme; an alcohol intervention service for older adults (aged 50+). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment was used to screen for cognitive impairment; alcohol use was assessed using the alcohol use disorders identification test. Findings In total, 531 participants completed the assessment at treatment entry. Over half the sample were male (57%), with a mean age of 60 years (Standard deviation: 7.09). Almost half (48.4%) had cognitive impairment at the entry to treatment: 51.6% had a normal cognitive function, 41.4% had mild cognitive impairment, 5.8% had moderate cognitive impairment and 1.1% had severe cognitive impairment. Cognitive impairment was not associated with increased treatment drop-out and was not predictive of alcohol use following treatment. Alcohol treatment was associated with a significant improvement in cognitive functioning. Originality/value This study suggests there may be a significant amount of unidentified cognitive impairment amongst older adults attending alcohol treatment. Assessment and routine screening for cognitive impairment in drug and alcohol services may help in care planning and setting treatment goals; in the absence of routine screening opportunities for treatment planning and intervention may be missed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".