DemTect effective in screening for mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kalbe E, Kessler J, Calabrese P, et al . DemTect: a new, sensitive cognitive screening test to support the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment and early dementia. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2004;19:136–43.[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] Q Does the DemTect reliably detect mild dementia and mild cognitive impairment in older adults? ### ![Graphic][5] Design: Prospective cohort study. ### ![Graphic][6] Setting: Three centres in the UK; timeframe not stated. ### ![Graphic][7] People: 121 people aged 45–92 years with possible mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease (NINCDS-ARDRA criteria; Clinical Dementia Rating scale (CDR) 1 or 2). 97 people aged 45–92 years with mild cognitive impairment (Peterson criteria; CDR 0.5). 145 people aged 45–89 years with no cognitive impairment (CDR 0). Control group was divided into <60 years and ⩾60 years. Alzheimer’s disease group was divided into Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) ⩾21 and MMSE <21. ### ![Graphic][8] Test: The DemTect includes … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DInternational%2Bjournal%2Bof%2Bgeriatric%2Bpsychiatry%26rft.stitle%253DInt%2BJ%2BGeriatr%2BPsychiatry%26rft.aulast%253DKalbe%26rft.auinit1%253DE.%26rft.volume%253D19%26rft.issue%253D2%26rft.spage%253D136%26rft.epage%253D143%26rft.atitle%253DDemTect%253A%2Ba%2Bnew%252C%2Bsensitive%2Bcognitive%2Bscreening%2Btest%2Bto%2Bsupport%2Bthe%2Bdiagnosis%2Bof%2Bmild%2Bcognitive%2Bimpairment%2Band%2Bearly%2Bdementia.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1002%252Fgps.1042%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F14758579%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/gps.1042&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=14758579&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmental%2F7%2F3%2F70.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000189096800005&link_type=ISI [5]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [6]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [7]: /embed/inline-graphic-3.gif [8]: /embed/inline-graphic-4.gif
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".