MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7116871002 · doi:10.1002/alz70861_109025

Interface of Sleep Quality and Cognitive Health in Prevention of Dementia: SMRUTHI‐INDIA

2025· article· en· W7116871002 on OpenAlexaff
Shubham Gupta, Anu Gupta, N Nilima, Hina Narzari, Kapil Sharma, Aditi Dubey, Varuna Sharma, Sakshi Sharma, Kajal Fulara, Sneha, Kaamini Kashyap, Shikha Chaudhary, Phaniraj Vastrad, Priya darshanraj N, Sandip Bhattacharjee, Gajraj Singh Shekhawat, Harshath Ajay V, R Sandesh, Ambika YV, Bijoya Sen, Shalina Jamatia, Priyanka Kumari Meena, Hitesh Tiwari, Shaily Bhushan, Sagar Pm, Ripanjit Singh, Manish Acharjee, Aishwarya Bhovi, Mailarappa Padiyappa Hooli, Shilpa K, Naveen MR, Dipankar Deb, Pameli Jamatia, Akhilesh Nagar, Tinku Yogi, Rishav Bhatia, R. K. GAUTAM, MA Khan, Vinay Patil, Rajeev Aggarwal, Ashima Nehra, Subarna Roy, Manish Barvaliya, Subrata Baidya, Shampa Das, P K Anand, Abhik Sinha, Venugopalan Y Vishnu, MV Padma Srivastava

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsCanadian Rural Health Research Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionSleep (system call)DementiaPsychological interventionSleep qualityQuality (philosophy)Quality of life (healthcare)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: SMRUTHI-INDIA is a Cohort Multiple Randomized Controlled Trial (cmRCT) study examining risk and protective factors in preventing dementia. Globally, around 50 million adults are diagnosed with dementia, with India accounting for approximately 16% of these cases. Identifying protective factors, such as sleep quality, may help delay or prevent its onset. This study explores the potential protective role of sleep quality in maintaining cognitive health among the elderly. METHOD: This study employed a cmRCT design, allowing for repeated RCTs within an established cohort. The cohort was formed across four rural zones of India, focusing on dementia risk factors with annual neuropsychological assessments over five years. The current sample includes 2,402 individuals aged 55 and above. Sleep quality and cognition were assessed using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination III (ACE-III). Sex-based comparisons were analysed using the Wilcoxon Rank-Sum test. RESULT: Of 2,402 participants, 61.62% were females. Based on PSQI scores, 1,981 participants (83%) had good sleep quality (PSQI < 5), where data of 14 females and 10 males was not available due to lack of consent. Among females, 1,183 had good sleep quality; among males, 798 had good sleep quality. Cognitive performance, measured using ACE-III, was compared across sleep quality groups using Wilcoxon Rank-Sum test. In males, poorer sleep quality was significantly associated with lower cognitive scores (p = 0.01). However, no significant association was observed in females (p = 0.7), indicating a potential sex-specific difference in the relationship between sleep quality and cognitive function. CONCLUSION: The findings of current study suggest that poor sleep quality is significantly associated with reduced cognitive performance in elderly males but not in females, highlighting a possible sex-specific difference in how sleep affects cognitive health. These results underscore the importance of considering gender-specific approaches when designing interventions to preserve cognitive function and potentially prevent dementia in aging populations. Further longitudinal analysis may help clarify the underlying mechanisms and long-term impact of sleep quality on cognitive decline.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.351 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicSleep and related disorders→French-language works237,207→