Cumulative Stress Exposure and Cognitive Function Among Older Adults: The Moderating Role of a Healthy Lifestyle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Although chronic stress is a risk factor for poor age-related cognitive health, there is limited research that has examined how cumulative stress across the lifespan affects cognitive aging. There may also be resilience factors that minimize the effects of cumulative stress on cognitive health. Engaging in a healthy lifestyle is protective against cognitive decline and may therefore interact with cumulative stress to buffer the stress-cognition relationship. The objective of the current study was to examine the moderating role of a healthy lifestyle, comprised of physical activity, social engagement, and sleep quality, in the relationship between cumulative stress exposure (CSE) and baseline and change in cognitive performance (global cognition, episodic memory, executive function) over 9 years among 1,297 older adults in the Midlife in the United States cohort (Mage = 69.0 ± 6.4, 57.8% female). METHODS: CSE and healthy lifestyle behaviors were indexed using self-reported questionnaires at baseline, and cognitive function was assessed using a battery of standardized neuropsychological tests at baseline and follow-up. RESULTS: Controlling for age, sex, education, race, marital status, employment status, hypertension, diabetes, and depression, higher CSE was associated with poorer baseline performance and slower decline over time in global cognition and executive function, but not episodic memory. A healthy lifestyle did not significantly moderate the relationship between cumulative stress and cognitive function. Exploratory analyses showed a significant cumulative stress-cognition relationship among females only. DISCUSSION: This study lends support for a lifespan model of cognitive aging and suggests that the cognitive health consequences of stress extend beyond immediate timescales.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".