Interrelationship of Sleep Disturbances and Cognitive Status on Mortality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sleep disturbances may promote the development and advancement of Alzheimer’s disease. Our purpose was to determine if sleep disturbances were associated with earlier mortality while accounting for cognition. The National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center database was used to evaluate mortality risk conferred by sleep, and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment score determined cognitive status. Demographics, sleep disturbances, cognitive status, and comorbid/other neuropsychiatric conditions were examined as predictors of survival time via Cox regression. The sample (N = 31,110) had a median age [interquartile range] of 72 [66, 79] years, MoCA score of 23 [16, 26], and survival time of 106.0 months [104.0,108.0]; 10,278 (33%) died during follow-up; 21% (n = 6461) experienced sleep disturbances. Sleep disturbances impacted survival time depending on cognition, with the greatest effect in transition from normal to cognitive impairment ( P < .001). Findings support that sleep disturbances negatively impact survival time, and the impact of sleep disturbances on survival time is interrelated with cognition.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".