Factors Influencing the Deterioration from Cognitive Decline of Normal Aging to Dementia among Nursing Home Residents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: A dearth of differential research exists regarding the determinants of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and moderate cognitive impairment or dementia among nursing home residents. This study aimed to identify and examine the association between medical factors (number of comorbidities, hospitalization, disability, depression, frailty and quality of life) and moderate cognitive impairment or dementia in nursing homes residents. Methods: A cross-sectional design was used in this study. Convenience sampling of 182 participants was conducted in nursing homes located in the central part of Jordan. Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) was used to screen both MCI and moderate cognitive impairment or dementia. Bivariate analysis, including t-test and ANOVA test, and logistic and linear regression models were used to examine and identify the medical factors associated with moderate cognitive impairment or dementia compared to mild cognitive impairment. Results: Most nursing home residents had MCI (87.4%) compared to a few with moderate cognitive impairment or dementia. Age (t = -2.773), number of comorbidities (t = -4.045), depression (t = -4.809), frailty (t = -4.038), and quality of life physical (t = 3.282) and mental component summaries (t = 2.469) were significantly different between the stages of cognitive impairment. Marital status (t = -4.050, p < 0.001), higher-income (t = 3.755, p < 0.001), recent hospitalization (t = 2.622,p = 0.01), depression (t = -2.737, p = 0.007), and frailty (t = 2.852, p = 0.005) were significantly associated with mental ability scores among nursing home residents. Conclusion: The coexistence of comorbidities and depression among nursing home residents with MCI necessitates prompt management by healthcare providers to combat depressive symptoms in order to delay the dementia trajectory among at-risk residents. Trail registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04589637, October 15,2020, Retrospectively registered.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| 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".