MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390081784 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igad104.2096

BIOLOGICAL AGE AND COGNITIVE PERFORMANCE AMONG LATE MID-LIFE WOMEN

2023· article· en· W4390081784 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rebecca C. Thurston, Cynthia Kusters, Yue‐Fang Chang, Pauline M. Maki, Judith Carroll

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive Abilities and Testing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVerbal fluency testCognitionPsychologyCognitive declineEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceCognitive reserveNeuropsychological testNeuropsychologyEpisodic memoryVerbal memoryTrail Making TestVerbal learningAudiologyDevelopmental psychologyDementiaMedicineDiseasePsychiatryCognitive impairmentInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Older biologic age, indicated by accelerated epigenetic aging, may place women at risk for poorer cognitive performance as they age. However, findings are inconsistent and based upon limited neuropsychological batteries. Studies of midlife women are few, yet women comprise two thirds of those with Alzheimer’s disease, and midlife is a critical transition and potential window for early intervention. We tested whether greater epigenetic age would be associated with poorer cognitive performance among late midlife women. 224 MsBrain study participants (average age=59 years, 82% White, 14% Black, 4% other ethnicities) underwent phlebotomy, including epigenetic aging clock estimates (GrimAge, DunedinPACE, PCPhenoAGE), and a neuropsychological battery assessing global cognitive function (Montreal Cognitive Assessment), verbal learning and memory (California Verbal Learning Test), working memory and attention (Letter Number Sequencing), letter fluency (P, R, W); semantic fluency (animal task), spatial ability (Card Rotations), processing speed (Symbol Digit Modalities Test), and perceptual speed (Finding A’s). In linear regression models controlling for age, race, and education, older PCPhenoAge was associated with poorer global cognitive performance [B(SE)=-.07(.03), p=.01], verbal memory [B(SE)=-.09(.03), p=.006], working memory [B(SE)=-.12(.03), p=.0001], attention [B(SE)=-.10(.04), p=.02], spatial ability [B(SE)=-.77(.34), p=.02], processing speed [B(SE)=-.24(.09), p=.007], and somewhat lower letter fluency [B(SE)=-.23(.13), p=.07]. GrimAge and DunedinPACE showed similar yet less consistent patterns. Interactions by race (p’s<.05) indicate that associations between older biologic age and poorer cognitive performance (verbal learning, verbal memory, processing speed) was particularly pronounced among Black women in the sample. Older biologic age is associated with poorer cognitive performance across multiple domains among late midlife women, particularly for Black women. Biologic age may serve as an early indicator of risk that could help identify women warranting early intervention to help maintain cognitive function. Supported by NIH RF1AG053504, R01AG053504, K24HL123565

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicCognitive Abilities and TestingFrench-language works237,207