Masticatory performance and quality of life of HK older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To examine the association between masticatory performance (MP) of older adults and their oral health-related (OHRQoL) and general health-related quality of life (HRQoL). 700 older adults aged ≥60 were recruited from outpatient clinics and community centers in Hong Kong(HK). Participant's objective MP was assessed through a* value of colour-changeable chewing gum, maximum anterior, and posterior bite force. Subjective MP was evaluated with a validated chewing function questionnaire(CFQ). The validated Cantonese version of the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index(GOHAI) and 12-item Short-Form Health Survey(SF-12) were used as the OHRQoL and HRQoL measures respectively. Other variables included socio-demographic characteristics, smoking habit, disease counts, handgrip strength, Clinical Frailty Scale(CFS), Katz Index of Independence in Activities of Daily Living(ADL), Lawton Instrumental ADL(C-IADL), Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form(MNA-SF), and HK 5min-Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores. The mean GOHAI, PCS-12 and MCS-12 (physical and mental component summary of SF-12) scores were 51.5, 46.4 and 52.5 respectively. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that participants who were older, had higher maximum posterior bite force, CFQ scores, Lawton C-IADL scores, and lower disease counts had higher GOHAI scores, indicating better OHRQoL. Regarding HRQoL, PCS-12 score had significant association with CFQ score, gender, disease counts, CFS and Lawton C-IADL score; whereas MCS-12 score was significantly related to CFQ score, age, disease counts, CFS, MNA status and handgrip strength. Better subjective MP as indicated by higher CFQ score was associated with better OHRQoL and HRQoL status among older adults in HK. Of the three measures of objective MP, only maximum posterior bite force had a significant association with OHRQoL.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 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".