The Relationship between Body Mass Index and Cognitive Function in Young Adults - A Correlational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cognitive functions are conscious mental activities such as thinking, remembering, learning and using language. The function of cognition is the ability of attention, memory, judgement, problem solving and executive abilities such as planning, evaluating and monitoring. Body mass index (BMI) is an estimate of body fat based on height and weight. It can help determine whether a person is at an unhealthy or healthy weight. Several studies indicate that cognitive function is impaired in elderly population with respect to BMI and also indicate that greater BMI in midlife is associated with higher risk of cognitive impairment. So, this study aimed to investigate the relationship between body mass index and cognitive function in young adults. Methodology: A "Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) scale" was filled by the 134 young adults (18 to 35 years) through interview method. Result: Statistical analysis was done using SPSS version 20. Pearson's test of correlation was applied between outcome measures. There is a weak negative but statistically significant correlation found between body mass index (BMI) and MOCA scores (r = -o.174). Conclusion: This study demonstrated weak negative correlation between body mass index and cognitive function in young adults. Key words: Body mass index, Cognitive function, Young adults.
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 | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".