Reserva cognitiva en una muestra de adultos del Área Metropolitana de Rosario: su relación con el nivel de ingresos y el rendimiento cognitivo.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este trabajo integrador final busca indagar sobre la relación de los niveles de reserva cognitiva con el nivel de ingreso y con el rendimiento cognitivo global. Se trata de una investigación de campo, para lo cual se adopta un enfoque metodológico cuantitativo con diseño no experimental y transversal. Participaron 172 adultos argentinos de Rosario y alrededores. Se trata de un muestreo no probabilístico, por conveniencia, invitando a sujetos que participaban de una campaña pública y gratuita de prevención del deterioro cognitivo y demencias. Se administró el Cuestionario de Reserva Cognitiva, la evaluación cognitiva de Montreal (MOCA) y un cuestionario sociodemográfico. Los resultados muestran que personas con bajo nivel de ingresos tienen baja reserva cognitiva, y que mayor reserva cognitiva se correlaciona con un mejor estado de las funciones cognitivas. Por lo tanto, se concluye que la situación socioeconómica de un sujeto condiciona su nivel de reserva cognitiva, y que una mayor reserva atenuaría los cambios cognitivos negativos asociados al envejecimiento.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".