A comparison of cognitive and health assessment tools used in a dementia prevention and risk management program for urban-dwelling older aboriginal Australians (DAMPAA)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In partnership with Aboriginal Elders and Aboriginal community-controlled organisations, we developed a dementia risk management and prevention program for Aboriginal Australians aged ≥45 years. In this study, we report neuropsychological assessment data for people who underwent eligibility screening and baseline assessment and explore associations between the cognitive assessment tools used. Fifty Aboriginal people living in metropolitan Perth, Western Australia without known dementia were assessed with the Kimberley Indigenous Cognitive Assessment dementia screening tool (KICA-Cog) and a battery of standard neuropsychological tests. Participants were aged 45–80 years (mean 63.5; standard deviation [SD] 9.4 years). Eleven participants (22.0 %) were male and 39 (78.0 %) were female. Of 49 participants with complete data, 13 (26.5 %) had a GAD-7 score indicating a possible anxiety disorder and 20 (40.8 %) had a KICA-Dep score indicating possible depression. All participants were screened with the KICA-Cog and 44–49 were screened with the other tests. The mean KICA-Cog score was 37.2 (SD 1.7; range: 33–39) and the mean Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score was 22.2 (SD 4.5; range: 13–30). There were moderate correlations between the KICA-Cog and MoCA, Symbol Digit Modalities Test (oral version), and Hopkins Verbal Learning Test total immediate recall and delayed recall scores. There were weak or no correlations between the KICA-Cog and other cognitive assessment tools. Four participants had previously been told they had cognitive impairment. The KICA-Cog and MoCA scores for these participants were 37.0 (SD 2.2; range: 34–39) and 18.8 (SD 1.5; range: 17–20), respectively. A high prevalence of possible depression and anxiety suggest mental health support may be required for people participating in dementia prevention programs. The KICA-Cog is the only valid screening tool for dementia in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, but its clinical utility could potentially be improved to better detect mild neurocognitive disorder. • The KICA-Cog is a valid dementia cognitive assessment tool but it has limited ability to detect mild neurocognitive disorder. • Incorporating more items that assess executive function abilities could enhance the utility of the KICA-Cog. • The KICA package is currently being reviewed to determine how its utility can be enhanced. • Culturally responsive cognitive assessments must be co-designed and validated with the population in which they will be used.
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 | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| 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 ».