Cognitive function mediates the relationship between age and anaesthesia-induced oscillatory-specific alpha power
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cognitive decline is common among older individuals, and although the underlying brain mechanisms are not entirely understood, researchers have suggested using EEG frontal alpha activity during general anaesthesia as a potential biomarker for cognitive decline. This is because frontal alpha activity associated with GABAergic general anaesthetics has been linked to cognitive function. However, oscillatory-specific alpha power has also been linked with chronological age. We hypothesize that cognitive function mediates the association between chronological age and (oscillatory-specific) alpha power. We analysed data from 380 participants (aged over 60) with baseline screening assessments and intraoperative EEG. We utilized the telephonic Montreal Cognitive Assessment to assess cognitive function. We computed total band power, oscillatory-specific alpha power, and aperiodics to measure anaesthesia-induced alpha activity. To test our mediation hypotheses, we employed structural equation modelling. Pairwise correlations between age, cognitive function and alpha activity were significant. Cognitive function mediated the association between age and classical alpha power [age → cognitive function → classical alpha; β = −0.0168 (95% confidence interval: −0.0313 to −0.00521); P = 0.0016] as well as the association between age and oscillatory-specific alpha power [age → cognitive function → oscillatory-specific alpha power; β = −0.00711 (95% confidence interval: −0.0154 to −0.000842); P = 0.028]. However, cognitive function did not mediate the association between age and aperiodic activity (1/f slope, P = 0.43; offset, P = 0.0996). This study is expected to provide valuable insights for anaesthesiologists, enabling them to make informed inferences about a patient’s age and cognitive function from an analysis of anaesthetic-induced EEG signals in the operating room. To ensure generalizability, further studies across different populations are needed.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".