Association of cognitive function with frailty, nutritional status, and quality of life in older adults with mild cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In older adulthood, mild cognitive impairment is an intermediate stage between normal aging and dementia, making its detection crucial. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the associations between cognitive function and frailty, nutritional status, and quality of life in older adults with mild cognitive impairment. METHODS: This work was conducted through a cross-sectional, analytical study involving 129 adults diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment, with a mean age of 68.07 ± 4.22. For cognitive assessment, the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Isaac Verbal Fluency Test, Trail Making Test (TMT), D2 Test of Attention (D2 Test), and Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) were completed; clinical and functional status was assessed using the frailty (FRAIL), Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), and life quality 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) questionnaires. RESULTS: Regarding overall cognitive performance, the presence of mild cognitive impairment was confirmed in the sample, as was the slowing of executive functions. Regarding selective attention, participants obtained an average of 138.30 points [SD = 4.30] in the D2 test, while the average score for processing speed measured using the DSST was 43.60 [SD = 3.50]. Regarding clinical and functional variables, the average FRAIL score was 2.26 [SD = 1.67], suggesting a high prevalence of frailty and pre-frailty; the average nutritional status was 27.91 [SD = 1.88], a range of adequate nutritional status. Finally, quality of life showed an average of 61.40 [SD = 14.87], indicating a moderate level. DISCUSSION: This study shows that frailty, nutritional status, and quality of life are closely related to mild cognitive impairment. These results reinforce the need for early and multidimensional interventions that contribute to preserving the quality of life.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".