MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294988404 · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101643

Different loneliness types, cognitive function, and brain structure in midlife: Findings from the Framingham Heart Study

2022· article· en· W4294988404 on OpenAlexaff
Qiushan Tao, Samia C. Akhter‐Khan, Ting Fang Alvin Ang, Charles DeCarli, Michael L. Alosco, Jesse Mez, Ronald Killiany, Sherral Devine, Ami Rokach, Indira Swetha Itchapurapu, Xiaoling Zhang, Kathryn L. Lunetta, David C. Steffens, Lindsay A. Farrer, Douglas N. Greve, Rhoda Au, Wei Qiao Qiu

Bibliographic record

VenueEClinicalMedicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsLonelinessMedicineDepression (economics)CognitionWechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleUCLA Loneliness ScaleCognitive declineLate life depressionInternal medicineDementiaCardiologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background It remains unclear whether persistent loneliness is related to brain structures that are associated with cognitive decline and development of Alzheimer's disease (AD). This study aimed to investigate the relationships between different loneliness types, cognitive functioning, and regional brain volumes. Methods Loneliness was measured longitudinally, using the item from the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale in the Framingham Heart Study, Generation 3, with participants' average age of 46·3 ± 8·6 years. Robust regression models tested the association between different loneliness types with longitudinal neuropsychological performance ( n = 2,609) and regional magnetic resonance imaging brain data ( n = 1,829) (2002-2019). Results were stratified for sex, depression, and Apolipoprotein E4 ( ApoE 4). Findings Persistent loneliness, but not transient loneliness, was strongly associated with cognitive decline, especially memory and executive function. Persistent loneliness was negatively associated with temporal lobe volume ( β = −0.18, 95%CI [−0.32, −0.04], P = 0·01). Among women, persistent loneliness was associated with smaller frontal lobe ( β = −0.19, 95%CI [−0.38, −0.01], P = 0·04), temporal lobe ( β = −0.20, 95%CI [−0.37, −0.03], P = 0·02), and hippocampus volumes ( β = −0.23, 95%CI [−0.40, −0.06], P = 0·007), and larger lateral ventricle volume ( β = 0.15, 95%CI [0.02, 0.28], P = 0·03). The higher cumulative loneliness scores across three exams, the smaller parietal, temporal, and hippocampus volumes and larger lateral ventricle were evident, especially in the presence of ApoE 4. Interpretation Persistent loneliness in midlife was associated with atrophy in brain regions responsible for memory and executive dysfunction. Interventions to reduce the chronicity of loneliness may mitigate the risk of age-related cognitive decline and AD. Funding US National Institute on Aging.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.327 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEClinicalMedicineSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207