Hearing loss and cognitive function among Chinese older adults: The role of participation in leisure activities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BackgroundHearing loss, a highly prevalent sensory impairment affecting older adults, is a risk factor for cognition decline. However, there were very limited studies on this association in low-resource countries. This study aimed to assess whether having hearing loss were associated with cognitive decline and engagement in leisure activities modified this association among Chinese elderly.MethodsUsing data from the nationally representative survey of China Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey (CLHLS) between 2011-2014, 9,710 individuals aged 65 years old or above with self-reported measures of hearing status and global cognition, as measured by the Modified Mini Mental Examination (MMSE), were included in this study. Fixed-effects models were used to estimate whether leisure activity engagement moderated the association of self-perceived hearing loss with global cognitive change in the overall sample and by sex.ResultsPeople with self-reported hearing loss was associated with cognitive impairment, with an odds ratio of 2.48 [1.22, 5.06]. Sex difference on the association of hearing loss and cognitive impairment was not found. Self-reported hearing loss was associated with cognitive function decline with 8% [-1.22, -0.39] increase in risk compared with those with normal hearing. Frequent engagement in leisure activities moderated the association between hearing loss and cognition. Actively participating in leisure activities modified the relationship between hearing loss and cognitive decline in males, while leisure activity engagement did not modify any associations among females.ConclusionHearing loss was associated with cognitive decline, and leisure activities engagement moderated the association among males rather than females.
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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".