The Recognition, Assessment and Management of Dementing Disorders: Conclusions from the Canadian Consensus Conference on Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: i) To develop evidence based consensus statements on which to build clinical practice guidelines for primary care physicians towards the recognition, assessment and management of dementing disorders; ii) to disseminate and evaluate the impact of these statements and guidelines built on these statements. OPTIONS: Structured approach to assessment, including recommended laboratory tests, choices for neuroimaging and referral; management of complications (especially behaviour problems and depression) and use of cognitive enhancing agents. POTENTIAL OUTCOMES: Consistent and improved clinical care of persons with dementia; cost containment by more selective use of laboratory investigations, neuroimaging and referrals; appropriate use of cognitive enhancing agents. EVIDENCE: Authors of each background paper were entrusted to: perform a literature search, discover additional relevant material including references cited in retrieved articles; consult with other experts in the field and then synthesize information. Standard rules of evidence were applied. Based upon this evidence, consensus statements were developed by a group of experts, guided by a steering committee of eight individuals from the areas of Neurology, Geriatric Medicine, Psychiatry, Family Medicine, Preventive Health Care and Health Care Systems. VALUES: Recommendations have been developed with particular attention to the context of primary care and are intended to support family physicians in their ongoing assessment and care of patients with dementia. BENEFITS, HARMS AND COSTS: Potential for improved clinical care of individuals with dementia. A dissemination and evaluation strategy will attempt to measure the impact of the recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS: See text. VALIDATION: Four other sets of consensus statements and/or guidelines have been published recently. These recommendations are generally congruent with our own consensus statements. The consensus statements have been endorsed by relevant bodies in Canada.
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 | 0.171 | 0.228 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| 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".