OBJECTIVE SLEEP AND CIRCADIAN REST–ACTIVITY RHYTHMS AND MULTIPLE DOMAINS OF COGNITIVE FUNCTION IN OLDER ADULTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Evidence suggests that sleep and circadian rest-activity rhythms (RAR) play a key role in dementia and Alzheimer Disease (AD) pathology. Studies with objective measures of sleep and RAR and multiple domains of cognition remain limited. We studied 820 older adults enrolled in the Study of Muscle, Mobility and Aging (SOMMA). Actigraphs were worn for one week, and processed for sleep-wake measures including total sleep time (TST) and sleep efficiency (SE); and parametric (acrophase, pseudo-F) and non-parametric (interdaily stability [IS], intradaily variability [IV], and relative amplitude [RA]) 24-hour RAR variables. Cognitive assessments included global cognition (the Montreal Cognitive Assessment), executive function (Trails B test), memory (California Verbal Learning Test-short form; and psychomotor performance (Digit-Symbol Coding Test). Adjusting for age, sex, clinic site and education, we examined adjusted mean cognitive test scores by categories of sleep and RAR exposures. Mean age was 76 years, 58% were female, and 15% were non-white. Higher RA, reflecting a more robust 24-hour RAR, was associated with better cognition on all tests (p for trend <0.05). Reduced SE was related to lower cognitive function (psychomotor performance, global cognition, memory; p<.05). There were no associations with TST and any cognitive measures examined. SE and RAR were variably associated with both global and specific domains of cognition in older men and women. The RA in particular was strongly related to multiple domains of cognition related to AD, and may be useful in identifying individuals at risk. Additional analyses will explore sex differences and longitudinal associations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".