Functional Social Support Subtypes Are Associated With Executive Function in Middle-Aged and Older Adults: Findings From the Baseline Comprehensive Cohort of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives We investigated whether functional social support—the degree to which one perceives support is available when needed—is associated with executive function, a key cognitive domain for everyday functioning and adaptation to change. Methods Analyses ( n = 23,491) utilized cross-sectional data from the Comprehensive cohort of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA), a population-based study of community-dwelling adults aged 45–85 years. Executive function was assessed by neurocognitive battery. Perceived social support was measured using the 19-item Medical Outcomes Study-Social Support Survey. Logistic regression models were adjusted for sociodemographic, health, and social covariates. Results Positive social interactions as well as affectionate and emotional/informational functional social support were positively associated with executive function. Discussion Social support plays an important role in cognitive health. Diversifying social programming beyond tangible social support to target other subtypes of support may help preserve executive function in middle-aged and older adults.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".