Research Letter: TBI Severity Moderates the Association Between Subjective and Objective Attention in Older Veterans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the moderating effect of traumatic brain injury (TBI) history on subjective and objective cognition across multiple cognitive domains. SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND DESIGN: Participants included 242 Vietnam-era veterans with a history of no TBI (n = 86), mild TBI (n = 74), or moderate-to-severe TBI (n = 82) from the observational Department of Defense-Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (DoD-ADNI) study. MAIN MEASURES: Objective cognition was the outcome and was measured using neuropsychological measures in the domains of memory, attention/executive functioning, and language. Subjective cognition was measured using the memory, divided attention, and language subscales from the Everyday Cognition (ECog) measure. TBI severity status was the moderating variable. RESULTS: Veterans with a history of moderate-to-severe TBI had a stronger negative association between subjective and objective attention relative to participants without a TBI ( P = .002). Although this association did not differ between mild TBI and no TBI history groups ( P = .100), the association between subjective and objective attention for the mild TBI group was intermediate to the no TBI and moderate-to-severe TBI history groups. TBI status did not moderate associations between subjective and objective memory or language. CONCLUSION: Results highlight the importance of assessing subjective and objective cognition in older veterans and the relevance of attention in the context of TBI history. More work is needed to better understand the intersection of TBI and aging and how these factors may be used to guide individualized assessment and treatment approaches for older veterans.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".