The mini-mental state examination and the montreal cognitive assessment after traumatic brain injury: An early predictive study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To compare results on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) to those on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and to predict the outcome at discharge from the acute care setting. RESEARCH DESIGN: A retrospective study. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: The MoCA and the MMSE were administered to 214 patients with TBI during their acute care hospitalization in a Level I trauma centre. Outcome was measured with the Disability Rating Scale (DRS). MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: A linear regression determined that the MoCA, the MMSE, TBI severity, education level and presence of diffuse injuries predicted 57% of the total variability of the DRS scores. The model without the MMSE had a R2 of 53.7% and the model without the MoCA had a R2 of 55.0%. The models without the MMSE or the MoCA had a R2 of 24.9%. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicated that the MoCA and the MMSE function as similar predictors of the DRS at discharge.
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 | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".