Age‐related differences in self‐report and objective measures of cognitive function in older patients prior to chemotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Evaluate for differences in demographic and clinical characteristics and subjective and objective measures of cognitive function (CF) between younger older adults (YOA, 60-69 years) and older adults (OA, ≥70 years). DESIGN: Cross-sectional. METHODS: Older oncology patients (n = 139) completed subjective (Attentional Function Index, European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC) CF scale) and objective (Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Trail Making Test (TMT) A & B) measures of CF prior to chemotherapy. Data were analyzed using parametric and nonparametric tests. RESULTS: No differences were found between the two groups for any of the subjective or objective CF measures, except that OA patients had higher TMT B scores. Compared with the general population, OAs had significantly higher EORTC CF scores and YOAs had significantly worse scores for all of the objective tests. Clinically meaningful difference between group differences was found for the TMT B test.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".