MétaCan
← all works

Comparative accuracies of two common screening instruments for classification of Alzheimer's disease, mild cognitive impairment, and healthy aging

2012· article· en· 408 citations· W2043020182 on OpenAlex· 10.1016/j.jalz.2012.10.001

Why is this work in the frame?

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

About CanadaIts subject is Canada, wherever its authors sit.

No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame — the usual design — would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Machine scores (provisional)

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

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.

Opus teacher head0.115
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread
0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the utility and diagnostic accuracy of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in a clinical cohort. METHODS: Three hundred twenty-one AD, 126 MCI, and 140 older adults with healthy cognition (HC) were evaluated using the MMSE, the MoCA, a standardized neuropsychologic battery according to the Consortium to Establish a Registry of Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD-NB), and an informant-based measure of functional impairment, the Dementia Severity Rating Scale (DSRS). Diagnostic accuracy and optimal cut-off scores were calculated for each measure, and a method for converting MoCA to MMSE scores is presented. RESULTS: The MMSE and MoCA offer reasonably good diagnostic and classification accuracy as compared with the more detailed CERAD-NB; however, as a brief cognitive screening measure, the MoCA was more sensitive and had higher classification accuracy for differentiating MCI from HC. Complementing the MMSE or the MoCA with the DSRS significantly improved diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSION: The findings support recent data indicating that the MoCA is superior to the MMSE as a global assessment tool, particularly in discerning earlier stages of cognitive decline. In addition, we found that overall diagnostic accuracy improves when the MMSE or MoCA is combined with an informant-based functional measure. Finally, we provide a reliable and easy conversion of MoCA to MMSE scores. However, the need for MCI-specific measures is still needed to increase the diagnostic specificity between AD and MCI.

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.

The record

Venue
Alzheimer s & Dementia
Topic
Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Field
Medicine
Canadian institutions
Funders
National Institute of Mental HealthNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of Pennsylvania
Keywords
Montreal Cognitive AssessmentDementiaMedicineCognitionCognitive impairmentClinical Dementia RatingMini–Mental State ExaminationAlzheimer's diseaseDiagnostic accuracyCohortDiseaseGerontologyAudiologyInternal medicinePsychiatry
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes