MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976026989 · doi:10.1017/s1041610205002693

IPA survey of brief cognitive screening instruments

2006· article· en· W1976026989 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Psychogeriatrics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaTest (biology)Geriatric psychiatryCognitionMedicineVerbal fluency testCognitive testCognitive declineRecallPsychologyPsychiatryFamily medicineGerontologyNeuropsychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Cognitive screening is a "first step" in detecting dementia and other neuropsychiatric syndromes and hence represents an important public health and clinical initiative. A plethora of cognitive screening instruments has been advocated in recent years, but the extent to which these instruments are used or their effectiveness is not well known. An International Psychogeriatric Association (IPA) survey was designed to determine which cognitive screening instruments were used most frequently by clinicians with special expertise in the neuropsychiatric aspects of old age and also to determine the ones considered most useful by these specialists. METHOD: Under the auspices of the IPA, the survey was mailed in the fall of 2004 to all IPA members as well as members of the American and Canadian Associations of Geriatric Psychiatry. The survey inquired about demographic information, the frequency of use of cognitive screening instruments, and the value attributed to the cognitive screening instruments. Participants also had an opportunity to provide written commentary. RESULTS: A total of 334 completed surveys were processed. The majority of respondents were geriatric psychiatrists (58%). Of the 20 different instruments that were listed on the survey, only six were selected as "routinely" or "often used" by the survey respondents. These instruments in declining order were: (1) the Folstein Mini-mental State Examination; (2) the Clock Drawing Test; (3) Delayed Word Recall; (4) the Verbal Fluency Test; (5) Similarities; and (6) the Trail Making Test. "Effectiveness" and "ease of administration" were the test characteristics most highly predictive of frequency of use. Open-ended comments highlighted patient factors that continue to provide challenges, including ethnicity/culture, language, education/literacy, and sensory impairment. Respondents concluded that "no single test is adequate." CONCLUSIONS: Psychogeriatricians worldwide routinely use a relatively small number of brief cognitive screening instruments. Further evaluation is necessary as the need increases for cognitive screening guidelines that inform public health initiatives related to dementia and neuropsychiatric syndromes.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.761

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it