Association of handgrip strength weakness and asymmetry with cognitive impairment and depressive symptoms in older Chinese adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the association between handgrip strength (HGS) asymmetry and weakness with cognitive function and depressive symptoms among 920 community-dwelling adults aged above 60 years in suburban Shanghai. Participants were selected using a multistage cluster-stratified sampling approach. Assessments included HGS measured with a dynamometer, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) for cognition, and the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) for depressive symptoms. Restricted cubic splines revealed a positive association between dominant HGS and MoCA scores, indicating better cognitive performance, and a negative association with GDS scores, suggesting fewer depressive symptoms. The association between the HGS ratio and MoCA scores and the HGS ratio and GDS scores varied by sex. Women with HGS weakness alone (odds ratio (OR) = 2.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.17-3.37), asymmetry alone (OR = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.14-3.29), or weakness and asymmetry together (OR = 2.57, 95% CI = 1.48-4.46) had a significantly increased risk of cognitive impairment. However, no such associations observed in men. These findings suggest that HGS weakness and asymmetrical HGS may be associated with a higher risk of cognitive decline and depressive symptoms, particularly in women. This study emphasizes the need for sex-specific assessments and prevention strategies to address cognitive and mental health issues among 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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".