Cognitive Functioning in Older People. Results of the First Wave of Cognition of Older People, Education, Recreational Activities, Nutrition, Comorbidities, Functional Capacity Studies (COPERNICUS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cognitive reserve as a way of explanation of why some individual with high degree of brain pathology are without clinical manifestations. Factors related to systemic diseases, body composition, aerobic capacity, past and current behavior were examined and included as predictors of cognitive function. Materials and methods: 407 subjects (60-88 years old) underwent physical examination and cognitive function assessment (Mini–Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Trail Making Test Part B (TMT B)). Predictors of cognitive functioning were evaluated: occupational status (OS), diet, mental and touristic activities were assessed using ad hoc questionnaire. Aerobic capacity was measured using six-minute walk test (6MWT). Results: With each year of age there is a decrease in MMSE score by 0.18 point. Varicose veins on lower extremities and low OS were also significantly associated with MMSE result. For every year of having hypertension, low OS and not being abroad in the last three years, there was 0.17, 0.30 and 0.16 less points, respectively, and 0.15 more point per one additional meter walked in 6MWT in the MoCA score. With each year of age and for low OS there was there was 0.31 and 0.21 second more to complete TMT B, respectively. Conclusion: Education, OS, presence of systemic diseases and social and tourist activities, aerobic capacity and body composition could be consider as factors contributing to cognitive functioning in older people. However, the relationship of above mentioned factors with education level and cognitive function may be not fully orthogonal.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".