Receptive Language Abilities for Females Exposed to Early Life Adversity: Modification by Epigenetic Age Acceleration at Midlife in a 30-Year Prospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Deviations from normative trajectories of receptive language abilities following early life adversity (ELA) may indicate an elevated risk for advanced cognitive aging and related morbidities. Accelerated epigenetic aging at midlife may further identify those at greatest risk for advanced cognitive aging following ELA. We examined whether accelerations in epigenetic aging at midlife can identify those individuals who demonstrated the greatest change in receptive language abilities following ELA. METHODS: Data were drawn from the Female Growth and Development Study (n = 86), a 30-year prospective cohort study of females exposed to substantiated child sexual abuse (CSA), a severe ELA, and a non-CSA comparison condition. The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised (PPVT-R) measured receptive language abilities on 6 occasions from childhood to mid-life. Interindividual differences in PPVT-R trajectories were examined in relation to CSA exposure and across 5 independent measures of epigenetic age acceleration derived from first (Horvath DNAmAge, Hannum DNAmAge) and second (GrimAge, PhenoAge, Dunedin Pace of Aging) generation epigenetic clocks. RESULTS: Quadratic growth models revealed that PPVT-R scores were significantly lower at age 25 for females exposed to CSA. Specifically, CSA exposed females had lower intercepts when GrimAge was accelerated and a smaller quadratic trend when PhenoAge was accelerated. DISCUSSION: ELA is associated with significant differences in development of receptive language abilities with the most pronounced differences observed for females with accelerated epigenetic ages at mid-life. These findings suggest that epigenetic age acceleration could serve as an indicator of differences in cognitive aging and portend to later adulthood cognitive functioning.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".