MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390104284 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1290064

Prioritizing determinants of cognitive function in healthy middle-aged and older adults: insights from a machine learning regression approach in the Canadian longitudinal study on aging

2023· article· en· W4390104284 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sarah Singh, Shiran Zhong, Kem A. Rogers, Vladimir Hachinski, Stephanie J. Frisbee

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersWeston Family FoundationWeston Brain Institute
KeywordsCognitionGerontologySocioeconomic statusEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceMedicineDementiaCognitive declineLongitudinal studyCohortCognitive skillPsychologyClinical psychologyDemographyEnvironmental healthPopulationPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The preservation of healthy cognitive function is a crucial step toward reducing the growing burden of cognitive decline and impairment. Our study aims to identify the characteristics of an individual that play the greatest roles in determining healthy cognitive function in mid to late life. Methods: Data on the characteristics of an individual that influence their health, also known as determinants of health, were extracted from the baseline cohort of the Canadian Longitudinal Study of Aging (2015). Cognitive function was a normalized latent construct score summarizing eight cognitive tests administered as a neuropsychological battery by CLSA staff. A higher cognitive function score indicated better functioning. A penalized regression model was used to select and order determinants based on their strength of association with cognitive function. Forty determinants (40) were entered into the model including demographic and socioeconomic factors, lifestyle and health behaviors, clinical measures, chronic diseases, mental health status, social support and the living environment. Results: The study sample consisted mainly of White, married, men and women aged 45-64 years residing in urban Canada. Mean overall cognitive function score for the study sample was 99.5, with scores ranging from 36.6 to 169.2 (lowest to highest cognitive function). Thirty-five (35) determinants were retained in the final model as significantly associated with healthy cognitive functioning. The determinants demonstrating the strongest associations with healthy cognitive function, were race, immigrant status, nutritional risk, community belongingness, and satisfaction with life. The determinants demonstrating the weakest associations with healthy cognitive function, were physical activity, greenness and neighborhood deprivation. Conclusion: Greater prioritization and integration of demographic and socioeconomic factors and lifestyle and health behaviors, such greater access to healthy foods and enhancing aid programs for low-income and immigrant families, into future health interventions and policies can produce the greatest gains in preserving healthy cognitive function in mid to late life.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public HealthSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207