Transitions across the cognitive frailty spectrum and its association with anxiety in individuals aged 55 years and over: a 7 years longitudinal study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined how psychological factors influenced cognitive frailty (CF) transition at 7 years follow-up among Malaysians ≥ 55 years at recruitment in 2013. Data from 554 participants, aged (mean ± SD) = 76.03 ± 13.3 years, 56.9% female were included. Frailty was assessed through the Cardiovascular Health Index and Fatigue, Resistance, Ambulation, Illness and Loss of Weight scale at baseline and follow-up respectively. Presence of one or two symptoms were considered prefrail; three or more were categorised as frail. Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) was defined as Montreal Cognitive Assessment score of 22 at baseline, and 18 for the blind version administered at follow-up. CF (i.e. frailty and MCI) was present among 6 (1.1%) participants at baseline and 16 (2.8%) at follow-up. 93 (16.8%) experienced improvement and 461 (83.2%) had worsening in CF status over 7 years. The 21-item Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale scores was associated with CF frailty transition. Improvement in CF status was observed among 92 (100%), 88 (97%) and 91 (100%) of those with normal to mild symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress respectively. Increased anxiety was found to be significantly associated with worsening transition over the 7 years period (odds ratio [95% CI] 3.38 [1.03, 11.10)]. Psychological status represents a potentially modifiable risk factor for progression within the CF continuum.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".