ASSOCIATION OF RAPID EYE MOVEMENT SLEEP AND APOE PROTEOTYPE TO COGNITIVE PERFORMANCE IN OLDER ADULTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Exploring the multifaceted interaction of sleep, disease-related biomarkers and cognitive decline is of particular importance for aging populations. Sleep quality and the APOE E3/E4 allele has been linked to Alzheimer’s Disease (AD). This study aims to examine relationships between older adults’ level of cognitive performance, proportion of rapid eye movement (REM) sleep, and APOE proteotype. Analysis of sleep study data collected in an active lifestyle retirement community - The Villages, Florida was conducted using a subset of markers collected as part of a larger cognitive health study. Polysomnography, cognitive battery (Montreal Cognitive Assessment(MoCA), Trail Making Tests(TMT), Symbol Digit Modalities Test(SDMT), Psychomotor Vigilance Test(PVT)), and APOE blood-biomarker (E2/E3,E3/E3,E3/E4) data were obtained from healthy participants (n=33) aged 55-65. Descriptive statistics, multilinear regression, and ANOVA were used. Participants’ mean age was 61.9 years, with 55% being male. Cognitive test scores did not show a significant relationship with REM sleep percentage (p=0.3096). No consistent dispersion or skew was shown in box plot analysis of APOE proteotype across cognitive performance measures. Unexpectedly, although not statistically significant (p=0.396), average REM sleep percentage was higher in the APOE E3/E4 group (20.04%, Mean:75.44 minutes) as compared to the E3/E3 group (15.99%,Mean: 59.07 minutes). Proteotype E3/E4 was examined specifically due to its potential association with Alzheimer’s disease. The REM sleep proportion was lower than the average experienced on a typical night at home, possibly due to study conditions. Further research is needed examining the relationship between older adults with REM sleep insufficiency and cognitive impairment.
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".