The relationship between social isolation and anxiety in people with cognitive impairment in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Social isolation among older adults with cognitive impairment is understudied. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between social isolation and anxiety in people with cognitive impairment in the United States. METHODS/DESIGN: Secondary data analyses were conducted using the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project (NSHAP) Wave 2 (2010-2011) dataset which includes a nationally representative sample of American older adults living at home. A total of 1343 people who had probable cognitive impairment measured by a Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score of 22 or less were selected. Anxiety was measured using the anxiety measure of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-A) and social isolation was measured using Perceived Social Isolation Scale. A weighted multivariable linear regression analysis and weighted F tests were used to examine the relationship between social isolation and anxiety. RESULTS: We observed that greater social isolation was related to increased anxiety in people with cognitive impairment (coefficients = 0.7242, t = 2.51, p = 0.015), adjusting for severity of cognitive impairment, race, pain, depression, activities of daily living, and instrumental activities of daily living. Weighted F tests showed that persons with clinically significant anxiety (HADS-A ≥ 8) had higher levels of loneliness, including feeling a lack of companionship, feeling left out, and greater social isolation. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study suggest that people with cognitive impairment can feel social isolation and it may contribute to their anxiety. Health care professionals, family, and friends of people with cognitive impairment should pay greater attention to social isolation of their loved ones.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".