Does Shiftwork Impact Cognitive Performance? Findings from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Few large nationwide studies have investigated the relationship between shiftwork and cognitive performance, and little is known about whether and how psychological distress may impact this relationship. This study aimed to examine: (1) the cross-sectional relationship between shiftwork (yes/no) and some aspects of cognitive performance (declarative memory and executive functioning) and (2) the potential moderating effect of psychological distress among 20,610 community-dwelling adults from the comprehensive cohort of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA). Differences by sex and retirement status were also explored. Shiftwork was significantly associated with poorer performance for executive functioning (interference condition: ß = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.63; MAT: ß = -0.85, 95% CI: -1.21 to -0.50) but not for declarative memory. Completely and not/partly retired males showed poorer cognitive performance on executive functioning. However, no evidence of a moderating effect by psychological distress was found. Our findings confirm the association between shiftwork and cognitive performance and highlight important health correlates of shiftwork.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".