Association between CAIDE risk score and episodic memory in middle-aged females: The impact of spontaneous menopause
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is growing evidence that postmenopause is associated with episodic memory decline in some females. Although midlife vascular risk factors are established predictors of brain health, it is unclear whether episodic memory decline at postmenopause is related to vascular risk, and whether such effects affect specific mnemonic functions (e.g. recollective processing vs. novelty detection). This study investigated whether vascular risk, measured by the Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging, and Dementia (CAIDE) score, predicts episodic memory in middle-aged females at pre- and post-menopause. Eighty-five cognitively unimpaired females (42 premenopausal, 43 postmenopausal) aged 39.5 to 65.1 years completed easy (low encoding load) and hard (high encoding load) versions of a face-location episodic memory task. Outcome measures were spatial source retrieval (correct source accuracy; CS) and detection of novel stimuli (correct rejections; CR). Linear-mixed models (LMMs) tested menopause group effects on CS and CR, while separate LMMs stratified by menopause status assessed whether CAIDE score predicted memory performance in each group. Results indicated that postmenopausal females performed worse than premenopausal females in both CS (β = 0.08, p < 0.001) and CR (β = 0.05, p = 0.011), with postmenopausal females more sensitive to task difficulty in CS. Higher CAIDE scores were associated with poorer CS accuracy in postmenopausal females only (β = -0.14, p = 0.009), with no effect on CR. These findings highlight the significance of vascular risk in episodic memory decline and emphasize the role of reproductive status in midlife cognition.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".