The Montreal Cognitive Assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HANDs) are common, often go undetected, and can impact treatment outcomes. There is limited evidence on how to perform routine cognitive screening in HIV clinical settings. To address this, 44 HIV-positive males were recruited from a Veteran Affairs Infectious Disease clinic and completed the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), International HIV Dementia Scale (IHDS), and Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale-21. In all, 50% scored below the MoCA cutoff and 36% scored below the IHDS cutoff. Current CD4 was the strongest predictor of an abnormal MoCA score (P = .007, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.987-0.998) and elevated depression was the second strongest predictor (P = .008, CI: 1.043-1.326). Combination antiviral therapy use and age were not significant predictors in this model. The MoCA appeared to be a reasonable screening tool to detect cognitive impairment in HIV-positive patients, and although it is not sufficient to diagnose HAND, it has the potential to provide meaningful clinical data.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".