AB033. The impact of visual impairment on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Cognitive assessments, such as the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), use components that assume intact sensory abilities, however, adults show concomitant decreases in visual acuity with increasing age. Scores on cognitive assessments are typically lower for individuals with visual impairments compared to individuals with normal/corrected to normal vision. But it is not clear if lowers scores on cognitive assessments are due to the assessments relying on visual stimuli, or if individuals with visual impairments are actually more likely to have cognitive impairments. Therefore we simulated visual impairments, i.e., reduced visual acuity and contrast sensitivity, in young healthy adults to determine how this impacts their scores on a measure of cognitive ability, i.e., the MoCA. Methods: Participants (n=19) completed one of the three version of the MoCA under three conditions (20/20, simulated 20/80, simulated 20/200). The MoCA was administered following the clinical protocols. Only participants that scored >26 (i.e., normal cognitive function) at 20/20 were included in the analysis. For comparison, we included MoCA data from a sample of older adults with normal vision (n=19, Mage =74, Acuity M=0.04 logMAR, SD=0.16) or visual impairment (n=19, Mage =79, Acuity M=0.35 logMAR, SD=0.3). Results: Acuity of participants at 20/20 (M=0.06 LogMAR, SD =0.1), simulated 20/80 (M=0.63, SD =0.18) and simulated 20/200 (M=0.88, SD =0.19) showed that the participants experienced simulated acuity loss with the goggles. For the MoCA scores, we found a main effect of acuity (F=16.22, P<0.001, η2=0.375, BF10 =5,618). Planned post hoc comparisons showed a significant difference between scores with a 20/20 acuity (M=27.26, SD=0.93) and 20/80 (M=24.74, SD=1.66, t=5.62, ptukey <0.001, d=1.88), and between 20/20 and 20/200 (M=25.63, SD =1.46, t=3.63, ptukey =0.002, Cohen’s d=1.33). However, no difference was observed between 20/80 and 20/200 (t=−1.99, ptukey =0.125, d=0.572). The MoCA scores in older adults with normal vision (M=27.32, SD =2.41) and with visual impairment (M=26.68, SD =2.52), did not differ significantly (t36=−0.787, P=0.436, d=0.26, BF10 =0.4). Conclusions: Our findings show that simulated reductions in visual acuity and contrast sensitivity lead to lower scores on measures of cognitive ability, specifically the MoCA. However, it appears that older adults with actual visual impairments may have developed compensatory strategies to adapt to this loss in visual acuity as there were no significant differences in scores of older adults with and without visual impairments. Therefore, we would recommend that when assessing an individual with visual impairments to conduct the cognitive test by re-scoring it without the visual components, e.g., the MoCA Blind, to magnify the visual components, or to substitue the visual component when possible using auditory alternatives, e.g., the oral trail making task.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle