0886 Daytime Sleepiness in the Development of Alzheimer's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is common in older adults and has recently been implicated in pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Sleep disruption is a possible reversible cause of memory impairment. Furthermore, quality of sleep has been determined to be one of the most important variables affecting overnight memory consolidation. Men and women differ in frequency and type of sleep complaints. As part of a larger study, data are presented on sex-stratified correlations between sleepiness and sleep-dependent memory consolidation in cognitively normal older adults with OSA. Methods Forty-Three participants (age 65 to 81 years; M=70.5 years, SD=4.3) deemed cognitively normal based on a Montreal Cognitive Assessment [MOCA] score of >26 were analyzed. The sample was 48.9% women; 86% White; 90.7% Non-Hispanic; and 73.8% with a bachelor's degree or higher. The Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) was used to assess general daytime sleepiness. Sleep-dependent memory consolidation was assessed using the Word-pairs Association (WPA) task. The WPA task shows a word pair for 5 seconds for the participant to learn and the next morning, post-sleep, the delayed recognition test is performed. Results Preliminary descriptive analyses revealed women had an average ESS of 5.4 (SD=3.0) and WPA score of 29.6 (SD=4.3); while men had an average ESS of 6.9 (SD=2.99) and WPA of 29.5 (SD=7.4). Non-parametric correlations, assessed to examine the association between ESS sum scores and WPA scores, revealed a significant negative correlation between ESS and WPA for female sex, but not for male sex. That is, in women, greater daytime sleepiness scores were associated with worse sleep-dependent memory consolidation (r=-.66, p= .01). Conclusion Preliminary findings of the ongoing study provide support for a sex specific association between daytime sleepiness and sleep-dependent memory consolidation. Further research on this topic is needed to determine optimal preventative strategies for older adults at risk of cognitive decline. Support (if any) 1R01AG063925-01A1 provided by 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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".