“Brain Wellness in Comiziano”: Epidemiological Study on Potential Protective Factors for Alzheimer’s Disease in a Small Italian Village
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aging of the population and, consequently, dementias represent a priority for global public health. This door-to-door epidemiological study was conducted in a small agricultural community with no migratory flows in the past few decades in Campania. The aim was to identify lifestyles that may be either favourable to the development of dementia. A total of 206 participants were recruited from 502 individuals aged 60 and over. The residents were assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Cognitive Reserve Index questionnaire. Regarding the factors associated with cognitive decline, there was a statistically significant association between older age and impairment in MoCA scores. Additionally, a statistically significant association was found between altered MoCA scores and weight loss over the past six months (p < 0.048). A statistically significant association was found between altered MoCA scores and the perception of cognitive deficit (p < 0.029). In conclusion, in our homogeneous community, a low prevalence of cognitive decline was observed, with cognitive reserve playing an important protective role, while advanced age, weight loss, and subjective cognitive deficit were identified as risk factors. Additionally, a low prevalence of cognitive deficits emerged, which may be associated with the habits and lifestyle of the inhabitants.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".