MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411894065 · doi:10.31083/ap44186

A Follow-up Study on the Trajectory and Sex Differences of Different Cognitive Dimensions in the Normal Aging Elderly in Guangzhou

2025· article· en· W4411894065 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jie Dong, Chan Su, Ruoxi Zhang, Xiong Luo, Ruoyan Huang, Bin Sun, Jia Li, Muni Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueALPHA PSYCHIATRY · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMemory spanMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitionWechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleAudiologyMedicineMini–Mental State ExaminationNeuropsychologyPsychologyGerontologyCognitive impairmentPsychiatryWorking memory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To explore trajectory and sex differences of varied cognitive dimensions over time in the normal aging elderly. Methods: The cluster sampling method was used to select a representative community (n = 341). Individuals aged 60 years and above with normal cognitive function were identified (n = 281). One-to-one neuropsychological tests were conducted at baseline and repeated 1 and 5 years later. A mixed linear model was developed to analyze the changes and sex discrepancies in different cognitive dimensions of the elderly based on the scores of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and World Health Organization Battery of Cognitive Assessment Instruments for the elderly (WHO-BCAI). Results: When comparing the 1-year follow-up with baseline data, the scores of auditory vocabulary in both men and women had significantly increased (t = –2.52, t = –4.8, p < 0.05), while the Wechsler mapping in women had significantly increased (t = –2.62, p < 0.05). When comparing the 5-year follow-up with baseline data, MMSE (t = 6.38, t = 6.06, p < 0.05) and MoCA (t = 7.34, t = 7.03, p < 0.05) scores had significantly decreased in both groups, the digit span scores had significantly decreased in men (t = 2.67, p < 0.05), and the scores of auditory vocabulary in women had significantly increased (t = –2.54, p < 0.05). When comparing the 5-year follow-up with the 1-year follow-up data, the digit span scores in women had significantly decreased (t = 2.88, p < 0.05), and the Wechsler mapping scores in both groups had significantly decreased (t = 3.68, t = 3.14, p < 0.05). A sex discrepancy emerged in several tests of specific cognitive domains after adjusting for education. At baseline, women outperformed men in auditory vocabulary, associative learning, and delayed recall while men outperformed women in Wechsler mapping. Importantly, auditory vocabulary and Wechsler mapping were better in women and men, respectively, at all visit times. The superiority of associative learning and delayed recall of women shrunk with advancing age. Conclusions: Sex differences in cognitive variation indicated a steeper decline for women in verbal episodic memory, associative memory, and short-term memory. Meanwhile, a sharper deterioration in memory, comprehension and recognition of spatial relationships, and visual structure ability was observed in men. The sex differences in different cognitive dimensions diminished over time.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueALPHA PSYCHIATRYSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207