Examining a Healthy Lifestyle as a Moderator of the Relationship between Psychological Distress and Cognitive Decline among Older Adults in the NuAge Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to examine whether a healthy lifestyle composite score of social engagement, physical activity, and Mediterranean diet adherence moderates the association between psychological distress and global cognitive decline among cognitively healthy older adults (67+ years of age at baseline). METHODS: A total of 1,272 cognitively intact older adults (Mage = 74.1 ± 4.1 years, 51.9% female) in the Quebec Longitudinal Study on Nutrition and Successful Aging (NuAge) completed a series of self-reported questionnaires to measure psychological distress and lifestyle behaviors, and the Modified Mini-Mental Examination (3MS) to assess cognitive performance at baseline and annually over 3 years. RESULTS: Controlling for sociodemographic and health-related characteristics, greater psychological distress was associated with steeper cognitive decline over time among males (B = -0.07, 95% CI: [-0.12, -0.02]), but not females (B = 0.008, 95% CI: [0.03, 0.04]). Although a healthy lifestyle composite score did not statistically significantly moderate the distress-cognition relationship (B = -0.005, 95% CI: [-0.02, 0.01]), there was an association between higher psychological distress and greater cognitive decline at low levels of social engagement (B = -0.05, 95% CI: [-0.09, -0.006]), but not at high levels of social engagement (B = 0.02, 95% CI: [-0.03, 0.07]). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the potentially harmful impact of stress on cognitive function may be malleable through specific healthy lifestyle behaviors and emphasizes the importance of taking a sex-based approach to cognitive aging research.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".