Childhood trauma and cognition status in an elderly sample with a mental disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Trauma is the result of distressing events that may affect people in an acute stage or result in chronic consequences. The occurrence of traumatic events throughout life has been considered a risk factor in the development of mental disorders. Although there is evidence that indicates early exposure to trauma may contribute to neurocognitive changes and may contribute to an augmented risk of dementia, there are mixed results. The present study aims to investigate the association between childhood trauma and neurocognitive decline related to dementia. METHOD: We included 95 participants from Biobank for Aging Studies of the University of Sao Paulo (BAS-USP). Subjects were previously diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder using Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Disorders (SCID) for Axis I, informant part. Childhood trauma and cognitive status were assessed with the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ) and the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR). Demographic and clinical characteristics were compared between individuals with no cognitive decline (CDR = 0) and those with cognitive impairment (CDR > 0) using the Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, chi-square test, or Fisher's exact test, as appropriate. Subsequently, a multivariable linear regression model, adjusted for age, sex, education, and race, was employed to investigate the association of childhood trauma with cognitive status. RESULT: Demographics showed an association between CDR scores and the variables age and education, participants in the CDR>0 group were older (p <0.001) and had lower education (p <0.001) in comparison with the CDR=0 group. Individuals with no cognitive decline (CDR=0) and with cognitive decline (CDR>0) did not differ in CTQ score (p = 0.748, table 1). The multivariable linear regression model did not find a statistically significant association between CTQ score and CDR (p = 0.931), nor between the other variables (table 2). CONCLUSION: Our data does not suggest a relationship between childhood trauma and cognitive decline in a psychiatric sample. Future studies including older participants with and without mental disorders may better elucidate this relationship.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".