Association between cognitive function and olfactory identification ability in community-dwelling older individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[Purpose] We investigated whether olfactory identification ability may be useful for early detection of cognitive decline. [Participants and Methods] The study included 55 community-dwelling older individuals without a history of mild cognitive impairment or dementia, who were capable of living independently. Cognitive function was evaluated using the Japanese versions of the Mini-Mental State Examination and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment tools. The olfactory identification ability was evaluated using the Odor Stick Identification Test for the Japanese. We also investigated the association between olfactory identification ability and cognitive function. [Results] Based on the Japanese version of the Mini-Mental State Examination, all participants were categorized into the noncognitive decline group, and based on the Japanese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment tool, 21 participants were categorized into the cognitive decline group. With regard to olfactory discrimination ability, we observed a significant difference between participants with and without cognitive decline based on the Japanese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores. Furthermore, we observed a significant positive correlation between the Japanese version of the the Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores and the Odor Stick Identification Test for the Japanese scores, although no significant correlation was observed between the Japanese version of the Mini-Mental State Examination and the Odor Stick Identification Test for the Japanese scores. [Conclusion] Olfactory identification ability may be useful to detect early-stage cognitive decline in community-dwelling older individuals.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".