The Lawton Instrumental Activities Daily Living/Activities Daily Living Scales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the diagnostic ability of the Lawton Instrumental Activities Daily Living (IADLs) scale and the Activities Daily Living (ADLs) scale as a sensitive tool to Alzheimer's disease (AD) in community-dwelling elderly people. DESIGN: In an old age memory outpatient center, among patients with a clinical diagnosis of AD dementia or no dementia supported by at least 6 months of follow-up, we looked back at the baseline Lawton IADL scale (short version IADL-4 item), ADL scale, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) values. RESULTS: There were 109 patients with AD and 53 nondemented individuals (81.4 ± 4.6 years). The sensitivity of ADL scale or IADL-4 item or the MMSE was low (52%-57%). The most efficient AD classification used both the IADLs-4 item and the MOCA with a threshold score of 20. Besides age and memory scores, the main correlates of IADLs scale or ADLs scale were executive, neuropsychiatric, vascular, and extrapyramidal scores. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the Lawton IADLs-4 item scale and ADLs scale lack sensitivity to AD dementia in elderly people and support a better sensitivity of MOCA rather than MMSE and IADLs-4 item/ADLs at the expense of specificity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".