MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416779491 · doi:10.7860/jcdr/2025/82946.22226

Correlation between Cognition, Functional Ability and Quality of Life in Older Adults having Subjective Cognitive Decline: A Cross-sectional Study

2025· article· en· W4416779491 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Madhuchhanda Mohanty, Jasobanta Sethi, Prakash Kumar, Meenakshi Batra

Bibliographic record

VenueJOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitionActivities of daily livingQuality of life (healthcare)CorrelationSocioeconomic statusPopulationAssociation (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Subjective Cognitive Decline (SCD) represents self-perceived cognitive impairment that may precede objective signs of cognitive decline. Exploring the association between cognition, functional ability, and Quality of Life (QoL) among older adults having SCD, will help in identification of at-risk population and tailor interventions. Aim: To investigate the association between cognition, functional ability and QoL among older adults having SCD across different Socioeconomic Status (SES) and gender. Materials and Methods: The present a cross-sectional study included data collected from the Outpatient Department (OPD) of a Rehabilitation Institution in Delhi,India between July 2023 to October 2023. Data from 130 older adults with SCD was taken by random sampling for cognition, functional ability, QoL and SES. Cognition was assessed using Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) and Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination III (ACE-III). Functional ability was measured by Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (L-IADL) Scale, QoL {Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)} by SF-36 Health Survey and Kuppuswamy socioeconomic scale was used to measure SES. Descriptive statistics, Pearson product-moment correlations, and chi-square tests were used to explore the association between the variables. Results: SES was not significantly correlated with IADL (r=- 0.098, p=0.267), SF-36 scores (r=0.131, p=0.138), or ACE-III scores (r=0.145, p=0.099). In males, a statistically significant moderate positive correlation was found between MOCA and ACE-III scores (r=0.521, p<0.001), indicating consistency in cognitive assessment tools and no significant correlations were found between SES and MOCA (r=0.137, p=0.221), IADL (r=-0.076, p=0.502), or SF-36 scores (r=0.072, p=0.520). Among females, a statistically significant moderate-to-strong correlation was also observed between MOCA and ACE-III scores (r=0.546, p<0.001). Additionally, a weak but positive, nearly significant correlation was observed between SES and MOCA scores (r=0.255, p=0.078), indicating a possible trend. The correlation between SES and SF-36 was also weak and non-significant (r=0.212, p=0.143). Conclusion: A statistically significant moderate positive correlation was observed between MOCA scores and ACEIII scores. This indicates that participants who scored higher on the MOCA also tended to have higher ACE-III scores. The correlation between SES and MOCA score was weak and not statistically significant. Other variables did not show strong or statistically significant relationships.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.119
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.119
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCHSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207