Social Capital Associates With Better Cognitive Health, Oral Health and Epigenetic Age Deceleration: Findings From the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Social exposures are linked to an array of health outcomes, especially around aging. In this study, we examined the association of social capital, defined as social relationships and networks, with clinical and biological outcomes including cognitive health, oral inflammation, and epigenetic aging. Methods: We used data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) ( n = 1,479; aged 45–85 years), categorizing social capital as structural and cognitive capital. Oral inflammation was determined as the presence of gum bleeding. Epigenetic aging was computed as the difference between chronological age and DNA methylation age. We constructed multivariable regression models adjusted for covariates to assess the relationships of interest. Results: Higher structural social capital was associated with decelerated epigenetic aging and better cognitive health outcomes, while higher cognitive social capital was associated with better cognitive outcomes and less oral inflammation. Conclusion: Enhanced social capital may contribute to better clinical and biological outcomes around 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 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".