Relationship between respiratory function assessed by spirometry and mild cognitive impairment among community‐dwelling older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim Aging is a major cause of cognitive dysfunction. It has also been reported that respiratory function may influence cognitive dysfunction. However, few studies have examined the relationship between cognitive function and respiratory function among community‐dwelling older adults. This study aims to determine the relationship between respiratory function, assessed using spirometry, and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in community‐dwelling older adults. Methods This study included 419 participants aged 73 ± 1 years and 348 participants aged 83 ± 1 years from the SONIC cohort study (Septuagenarians Octogenarians Nonagenarians Investigation with Centenarians Study). Respiratory function was evaluated using %Vital Capacity (%VC), Forced Expiratory Volume 1 s (FEV 1 )/Forced Vital Capacity (FVC), and %Peak Expiratory Flow (%PEF). Airflow‐limitation presence and stages were classified using FEV 1 /FVC. Cognitive function and MCI were assessed using the Japanese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA‐J). Results The MoCA‐J score exhibited a declining trend as the airflow‐limitation stage increased among study participants in the 83 ± 1 age group. The presence of airflow limitation was associated with MCI in the 83 ± 1 age group. Among the indicators of each respiratory function, low %PEF was found to be associated with an increased rate of MCI. Furthermore, low %VC has also been suggested to be associated with an increased rate of MCI in the 83 ± 1 age female group. Conclusions Advanced airflow‐limitation stages may exacerbate cognitive dysfunction in community‐dwelling older adults. The presence of airflow limitation and low %VC may also be associated with cognitive dysfunction in older women. Consequently, reduced respiratory function may potentially be associated with MCI in community‐dwelling older adults. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2024; ••: ••–•• .
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".