Cytomegalovirus Immunity, Inflammation and Cognitive Abilities in the Elderly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reducing the socioeconomic toll from age-related physical and mental morbidities requires better understanding of factors affecting healthy aging. While many environmental, lifestyle, and genetic factors affect healthy aging, this study addressed the influence of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection and immunity on age-related inflammation and cognitive abilities. Healthy adults 70–90 years old were recruited into a prospective study investigating relationships between anti-CMV immunity, markers of inflammation, baseline measures of cognitive ability, and changes in cognitive ability over 18 months. Humoral and cellular responses against CMV, levels of inflammatory markers, and cognitive abilities were measured at study entry, with measurement of cognitive abilities repeated 18 months later. CMV-seropositive and -seronegative sub-groups were compared, and relationships between anti-CMV immunity, markers of inflammation, and cognitive ability were assessed. Twenty-eight of 39 participants were CMV-seropositive, and two had CMV-specific CD8+ T cell responses indicative of CMV immune memory inflation. No significant differences for markers of inflammation or measures of cognitive ability were observed between groups, and cognitive scores changed little over 18 months. Significant correlations between markers of inflammation and cognitive scores with interconnection between anti-CMV antibody levels, fractalkine, cognitive ability, and depression scores suggest areas of focus for future studies.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".