MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4353091991 · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1058951

Visual and cognitive functioning among older adults with low vision before vision rehabilitation: A pilot study

2023· article· en· W4353091991 on OpenAlexafffund
Gabrielle Aubin, Natalie A. Phillips, Atul Jaiswal, Aaron Johnson, Sven Joubert, Vanessa Bachir, Eva Kehayia, Walter Wittich

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityConcordia UniversityUniversité de Montréal
FundersCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
KeywordsPsychologyCognitionDementiaRehabilitationAudiologyContrast (vision)Visual acuityVisual memoryCognitive declineCognitive rehabilitation therapyVision rehabilitationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationDiseasePsychiatryMedicineNeuroscienceOphthalmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The occurrence of age-related vision changes is inevitable. However, some of these changes can become pathological. Research indicates that vision and hearing loss is correlated with age-related cognitive decline, and with a higher risk of developing dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. Low vision rehabilitation could possibly be a protective factor against cognitive decline, as it provides the clients with compensatory strategies to overcome their visual deficits. Objectives and hypothesis: The aim of this pilot study was to assess correlations between visual and cognitive functions in older adults referred for low vision rehabilitation. We hypothesized that more severe impairment of visual acuity and contrast sensitivity would be correlated with more advanced levels of cognitive impairment. The second objective was to examine which of these correlations would remain significant once established variables that influence cognition are statistically removed (e.g., age, education). Methods: Thirty-eight older adults (age range: 66-97 years old) with a visual impairment (acuity <20/70) were recruited before the onset of their low vision rehabilitation. They underwent vision (reading acuity, reading speed, contrast sensitivity), hearing (audiogram, speech-in-noise perception) and cognitive (global cognition, memory, executive functions) testing, and demographic information was obtained. Results and discussion: Correlations among global cognition and visual aid use, memory and reading speed, memory and contrast sensitivity, memory, and visual aid use, and between executive functions and contrast sensitivity were significant. Correlations between contrast sensitivity and memory, as well as between global cognition and visual aid use remained significant after controlling for age and education. The present study is relevant to clinicians who are assessing the cognitive status of older adults, such as neuropsychologists, because it highlights the importance of considering low vision when administering neuropsychological tests, especially to persons who have not yet received rehabilitation for their visual impairment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.611

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychologySame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207