Test Your Memory—Spanish version (TYM‐S): a validation study of a self‐administered cognitive screening test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To develop the Test Your Memory (TYM)-Spanish version (TYM-S), a self-administered cognitive screening test, in a Chilean older sample and to estimate its psychometric properties and diagnostic accuracy. METHODS: The TYM was translated into Spanish and adapted for a Chilean population to develop the TYM-S. Measures of global cognitive impairment and executive dysfunction were administered to 30 controls, 30 dementia patients, and 14 subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). All participants' proxies were interviewed with assessments of dementia severity, functionality in daily living activities, and cognitive change. Convergent validity and internal consistency reliability of the TYM-S were estimated. Cut-off points, sensitivity, and specificity were determined to test its diagnostic capacity for dementia or MCI. RESULTS: Regarding convergent validity, the TYM-S was significantly correlated (p < 0.001) with global cognitive impairment (Mini-Mental State Examination: r = 0.902; Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised-Chilean version: r = 0.922; Montreal Cognitive Assessment: r = 0.923), executive dysfunction (Frontal Assessment Battery: r = 0.862), dementia severity (Clinical Dementia Rating: r = -0.757), functional capacity (Technology-Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire: r = -0.864; Pfeffer Functional Activities Questionnaire: r = -0.748; Instrumental Activities of Daily Living: r = 0.769), and cognitive change (Alzheimer's Disease 8-Chilean version: r = -0.700) measures. Regarding reliability, Cronbach's α was 0.776. Optimum cut-off scores of 39 and 44 distinguished dementia cases from controls (93.1% sensitivity, 82.2% specificity) and MCI cases from controls (85.7% sensitivity, 69% specificity), respectively. The extent of assistance required in the TYM-S and cognitive impairment was correlated. CONCLUSIONS: The TYM-S is a valid and reliable instrument to assess cognitive impairment, showing good psychometric properties and diagnostic capacity to identify cases of dementia in a Spanish-speaking older cohort. Although its need for assistance may be limiting, its ability to quickly assess several cognitive domains supports widespread clinical use.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".