Supplementary Material for: Associations between differential aging and lifestyle, environment, current, and future health conditions: Findings from Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: An aging population is a pressing challenge for the healthcare system. Insights into promoting healthy longevity can be gained by quantifying the biological aging process and understanding the roles of modifiable lifestyle and environmental factors and chronic disease conditions. Methods: We developed a biological age (BioAge) index by applying multiple state-of-art machine learning models based on easily accessible blood test data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study of Aging (CLSA). The BioAge gap, which is the difference between BioAge index and chronological age, was used to quantify the differential aging, i.e., the difference between biological and chronological age, of the CLSA participants. We further investigated the associations between the BioAge gap and lifestyle, environmental factors, and current and future health conditions. Results: BioAge gap had strong associations with existing adverse health conditions (e.g., cancers, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, kidney diseases) and future disease onset (e.g., Parkinson's disease, diabetes, and kidney diseases). We identified that frequent consumption of processed meat, pork, beef, and chicken, poor outcomes in nutritional risk screening, cigarette smoking, exposure to passive smoking, are associated with positive BioAge gap (“older” than expected in BioAge index). We also identified several modifiable factors, including eating fruits, legumes, vegetables, related to negative BioAge gap (“younger” than expected in BioAge index). Discussion/Conclusions: Our study shows that a BioAge index based on easily accessible blood tests has the potential to quantify the biological aging process that is associated with current and future adverse health events. The identified risk and protective factors for differential aging indicated by BioAge gap are informative for guiding policy making to promote healthy longevity.
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 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.600 | 0.069 |
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".