Masticatory performance indicates the development of psychological frailty: A 6-year prospective cohort study by the SONIC study group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Although the association between oral health and physical frailty is well established, psychological frailty has not been investigated. Therefore, this prospective cohort study was conducted to examine the association between masticatory performance and psychological frailty in older community-dwelling Japanese individuals. METHODS: The participants included 498 older adults who completed baseline and 3- and 6-year follow-up surveys. The World Health Organization-5 (WHO-5) scale and the Japanese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-J) were used to evaluate the psychological frailty status of participants. Psychological frailty was defined as a WHO-5 score < 13 and a MoCA-J score < 23. Masticatory performance was evaluated using a scoring method for the test gummy jelly (score: 0-9). A mixed-effects ordinal logit model analysis was used to examine the influence of masticatory performance and number of teeth on the development of psychological frailty while adjusting for relevant factors such as educational level, financial status, living situation, area of residence, history of chronic diseases, and handgrip strength. RESULTS: A total of 311 participants (62.5%) exhibited psychological robustness at baseline. The rates of development of psychological frailty after 3 and 6 years were 4.2% and 4.5%, respectively. The longitudinal analysis revealed that masticatory performance at baseline was negatively associated with the prevalence of psychological frailty and pre-frailty at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Decreased masticatory performance is associated with the development of psychological frailty in older community-dwelling people of Japanese descent.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".