Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Alzheimer's Disease Is A Neurodegenerative Disease Characterized By The Loss Of Cognitive Functions. Bilingualism May Be One Factor Contributing To Cognitive Reserve And Delay In Symptom To Onset. Objectives: To Assess Effect Of Bilingualism Compared With Monolingualism In Alzheimer's Disease. Methods: Systematic Review Of The Literature Of Observational Studies Comparing Bilingualism Versus Monolinguals In Patients With Alzheimer"S Disease. We Searched The Databases: The Cochrane Central Register Of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase And Lilacs. The Quality Of Each Included Study Was Assessed Using The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Two Reviewers Independently Extracted Data And Bias Risk Assessment. The Quality Of The Evidence Was Evaluated By The Grading Of Recommendations Assessment, Development And Evaluation. Results: Eight Studies Were Included In The Systematic Review. The Meta-Analysis Showed There Was No Difference Between Monolinguals And Bilinguals Group In The Outcomes: Cognitive Impairment
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 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".