Olfactory Function as a Potential Predictor of Cognitive Impairment in Men and Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Different previous studies indicated olfactory function as a predictor of several types of cognitive impairment, in particular related to neurodegenerative disease. However, scanty data are available on the role of odor threshold (OT), odor discrimination (OD), and odor identification (OI) as a predictor of cognitive impairment. The aim of this study was to evaluate potential correlations between each factor of the olfactory function versus each specific cognitive domain of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test on healthy subjects in relation to gender and age. METHODS: Sniffin' Sticks and MoCA tests were used to determine olfactory function and cognitive abilities, respectively. RESULTS: In men, significant correlations were found in OT versus language index score and OI versus language and executive index score, while in women, OD and OI were correlated to visuospatial index score. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggested that olfactory function (OT, OD, and OI) may be considered a predictor for cognitive impairment in relation to gender and age.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".