Usefulness of the japanese version of rapid dementia screening test for mild cognitive impairment in older patients with cardiovascular disease
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): JSPS KAKENHI Background Cognitive decline is common among older patients with cardiovascular disease and can decrease their self-management abilities. Therefore, early detection of cognitive decline is clinically important, as it can help guide effective home-based care measures, including education of family members and deployment of healthcare resources. However, the standard instruments for identifying mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are not always feasible in clinical practice. Purpose This study evaluated whether MCI could be detected using the Japanese version of the Rapid Dementia Screening Test (RDST-J), which is a simple screening tool for identifying cognitive decline. Methods This cross-sectional study included patients who were ≥ 65 years old and hospitalised because of cardiovascular disease. Patients with a pre-hospitalisation diagnosis of dementia were excluded. Each patient’s cognitive function had been measured at discharge using the RDST-J and the Japanese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-J), which is a standard tool for MCI screening. The RDST-J includes a number transcoding task and a supermarket task, and can be completed in 3 min (range: 0–12 points). The MoCA-J assesses nine domains of cognition and requires 10–15 min to complete (range: 0–30 points). The correlation between the two scores was evaluated using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was also conducted to evaluate whether the RDST-J could identify MCI, which was defined as a MoCA-J score of ≤ 25 points. Results The study included 78 patients (the mean age: 77.2 ± 8.9 years, men: 56.4%). Based on a MoCA-J score of ≤ 25 points, MCI was identified in 73.1% (n = 57) of the patients. The RDST-J and MoCA-J scores were strongly correlated (r = 0.835, p <0.001). The ROC analysis revealed that an RDST-J score of ≤ 9 points provided 75.4% sensitivity and 95.2% specificity for identifying MCI, with an area under the curve of 0.899 (95% confidence interval: 0.835–0.964, Figure 1). The same cut-off value was identified when excluding patients with a high probability of dementia (RDST-J score of ≤ 4 points). Conclusions The RDST-J is a simple instrument and its score was highly correlated with the standard test for identifying MCI in older patients with cardiovascular disease. Our results suggest that the RDST-J may be useful for routine cognitive assessments in clinical practice. Longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate whether the RDST-J scores respond to changes in cognitive status, as well as whether this tool can be used to predict adverse health outcomes after discharge.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
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 | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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) | 0,000 | 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».