P4–175: Singapore experience with cognitive screening
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Singapore has a rapidly ageing population with 1 in 5 Singaporean projected to be aged 65 and above by 2030. With this ageing population it is crucial that dementia is diagnosed early to ensure that the disease progression can be slowed and adequate resources can be channelled for the management of dementia. Community cognitive screening may provide an opportunity for early diagnosis. We report our experience with cognitive screening over the last 5 years. Retrospective analyses of the data from 5 community cognitive screening events held between 2008 and 2012 at the National Neuroscience Institute, Singapore. Subjects for each of the 5 screening events were from the community, aged >50 years and did not have a clinical diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment or dementia. Data on demographic information, vascular risk factor and cognitive data were studied. Cognitive testing was performed by trained raters and all subjects also underwent a clinical interview with clinicians. Cognitive screening tests included MMSE, MOCA and depression questionnaire. A total of 997 community participants with a mean age of 60.9 years were screened over 5 years. Female subjects accounted for 65.6% (n=654) and the majority were of the ethnic Chinese population (79.7%). Indians accounted for 6.4%, Malay 1.5% and other races 1.7%. 32.5% of the screening cohort were hypertensive, 13% had diabetes mellitus, 39.8% had hyperlipidemia, 6.6% had coronary heart disease and 1.3% had prior strokes. The mean MMSE scores over 5 years ranged from 27.6 to 28.7, MOCA scores ranged from 24.1 to 27.6. The proportion of subjects diagnosed with dementia and/or mild cognitive impairment saw a steady increase over the 5 years with 8.2% diagnosed with MCI/dementia in 2008 and 27.2% diagnosed in 2012. The proportion of patients with depression ranged from 6.7% to 15.7%. Cognitive screening is useful in the diagnosis of early dementia. In Asian cultures where there exists stigma to the diagnosis of dementia, subjects with mild symptoms and their families may be more open to attend cognitive screening sessions than seek direct medical opinion. Cognitive screening if well structured will allow early diagnosis and timely management.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".