MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365518783 · doi:10.1002/dad2.12427

Factors associated with cognitive impairment in Latin American older adults: A cross‐sectional observational study of COVID‐19 confinement

2023· article· en· W4365518783 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Miguel Ramos‐Henderson, Marcio Soto‐Añari, Jorge Herrera‐Pino, María F. Porto, Loida Camargo, Heike Hesse, Robert Ferrel‐Ortega †, César Quispe-Ayala, Claudia Garcı́a de la Cadena, Neyda Ma. Mendoza-Ruvalcaba, Nicole Caldichoury, Cesar Castellanos, Claudia Varón, Dolores Aguilar, Regulo Antezana, Juan José Martínez, Norbel Román, Carolina Boza, Alejandro Ducassou, Carol Saldías, Norman López

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia Diagnosis Assessment & Disease Monitoring · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyDementiaCross-sectional studyGerontologyMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineCognitionCognitive declinePsychologyDemographyCognitive impairmentPsychiatryDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The effects of COVID-19 confinement have been severe, especially in older adults. Therefore, we analyzed the factors associated with cognitive impairment (CI) in Latin America (LA). METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional observational study with a total of 5245 older adults from 10 countries in LA. Measurement: We used the Telephone Montreal Cognitive Assessment (T-MoCA) and the Eight-item Informant Interview to Differentiate Aging and Dementia (AD8) scale. RESULTS: We found that age, depressive symptomatology, bone fractures, being widowed, having a family member with dementia, and unemployment were associated with an increased risk of CI. In contrast, higher education, hypertension with continuous treatment, quarantine, and keeping stimulating cognitive and physical activities were associated with a lower probability of CI. No significant association was found between suffering from diabetes or being retired and CI. DISCUSSION: It is essential to conduct follow-up studies on these factors, considering their relationship with CI and the duration of confinement.

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)0.001
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia Diagnosis Assessment & Disease MonitoringSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207