MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Diagnostic Performance of Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire for Screening Dementia Among Patients Attending Cognitive Assessment Clinics in Singapore

2013· article· en· W2123732127 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chetna Malhotra, Angelique Chan, David B. Matchar, Dennis Seow, A. Chuo, Young Kyung

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the Academy of Medicine Singapore · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational University of Singapore
KeywordsDementiaMedicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMemory clinicOutpatient clinicCognitive impairmentMini–Mental State ExaminationReceiver operating characteristicCognitionPhysical therapyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire (SPMSQ) is a brief cognitive screening instrument, which is easy to use by a healthcare worker with little training. However, the validity of this instrument has not been established in Singapore. Thus, the primary aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic performance of SPMSQ for screening dementia among patients attending outpatient cognitive assessment clinics and to assess whether the appropriate cut-off score varies by patient's age and education. A secondary aim of the study was to map the SPMSQ scores with Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SPMSQ and MMSE were administered by a trained interviewer to 127 patients visiting outpatient cognitive assessment clinics at the Singapore General Hospital, Changi General Hospital and Tan Tock Seng Hospital. The geriatricians at these clinics then diagnosed these patients with dementia or no dementia (reference standard). Sensitivity and specificity of SPMSQ with different cut-off points (number of errors) were calculated and compared to the reference standard using the Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) analysis. Correlation coefficient was also calculated between MMSE and SPMSQ scores. RESULTS: Based on the ROC analysis and a balance of sensitivity and specificity, the appropriate cut-off for SPMSQ was found to be 5 or more errors (sensitivity 78%, specificity 75%). The cut-off varied by education, but not by patient's age. There was a high correlation between SPMSQ and MMSE scores (r = 0.814, P <0.0001). CONCLUSION: Despite the advantage of being a brief screening instrument for dementia, the use of SPMSQ is limited by its low sensitivity and specificity, especially among patients with less than 6 years of education.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.756

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.342 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the Academy of Medicine SingaporeSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207