The Relationship Between Hearing and Mild Behavioral Impairment and the Influence of Sex: A Study of Older Adults Without Dementia from the COMPASS-ND Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Hearing loss and mild behavioral impairment (MBI), both non-cognitive markers of dementia, can be early warning signs of incident cognitive decline. Objective: = 219; 107 females) from the Canadian Comprehensive Assessment of Neurodegeneration and Dementia (COMPASS-ND). Methods: Hearing was assessed with the 10-item Hearing Handicap for the Elderly-Screening (HHIE-S) questionnaire, a speech-in-noise test, screening audiometry, and hearing aid use. MBI symptoms were assessed using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI-Q). Multivariable linear regressions examined the association between hearing and MBI symptom severity and multiple logistic regressions examined the association between hearing and MBI domains. Results: HHIE-S score was significantly associated with greater global MBI symptom burden, and symptoms in the apathy and affective dysregulation domains. Objective measures of audiometric hearing loss and speech-in-noise testing as well as hearing aid use were not associated with global MBI symptom severity or the presence of MBI domain-specific symptoms. Males were older, had more audiometric and speech-in-noise hearing loss, higher rates of hearing-aid use, and showed more MBI symptoms than females, especially apathy. Conclusion: The HHIE-S, a subjective self-report measure that captures emotional and social aspects of hearing disability, was associated with informant-reported global MBI symptom burden, and more specifically the domains of affective dysregulation and apathy. These domains can be potential drivers of depression and social isolation. Hearing and behavior change can be assessed with non-invasive measures, adding value to a comprehensive dementia risk assessment.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".