Gender specific factors contributing to cognitive resilience in APOE ɛ4 positive older adults in a population-based sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although APOE ɛ4 has been identified as the strongest genetic risk factor for Alzheimer's Disease, there are some APOE ɛ4 carriers who do not go on to develop Alzheimer's disease or cognitive impairment. This study aims to investigate factors contributing to this "resilience" separately by gender. Data were drawn from APOE ɛ4 positive participants who were aged 60 + at baseline in the Personality and Total Health Through Life (PATH) Study (N = 341, Women = 46.3%). Participants were categorised into "resilient" and "non-resilient" groups using Latent Class Analysis based on their cognitive impairment status and cognitive trajectory across 12 years. Logistic regression was used to identify the risk and protective factors that contributed to resilience stratified by gender. For APOE ɛ4 carriers who have not had a stroke, predictors of resilience were increased frequency of mild physical activity and being employed at baseline for men, and increased number of mental activities engaged in at baseline for women. The results provide insights into a novel way of classifying resilience among APOE ɛ4 carriers and risk and protective factors contributing to resilience separately for men and women.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".