MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146549842 · doi:10.1111/psyg.12093

Evaluating the relationship between education level and cognitive impairment with the <scp>M</scp>ontreal <scp>C</scp>ognitive <scp>A</scp>ssessment Test

2015· article· en· W2146549842 on OpenAlex
Esra Yancar Demir, Tuba Özcan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychogeriatrics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionGerontologyPsychologyMedicineTest (biology)RecallFluencyAudiologyDemographyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is defined as 'a cognitive decline greater than that expected for an individual's age and education level but that does not interfere notably with activities of daily life'. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a screening test for MCI. METHODS: We investigated the performance of the Turkish version of the MoCA in detecting MCI among elderly persons in a rural area, the majority of whom have a low level of education. We evaluated 50 consecutive men referred from an outpatient clinic. Educational level was divided into three categories: group 1, less than primary (<5 years); group 2, primary (5 years); group 3, more than primary (>5 years). We evaluated the effect of education on MoCA scores and compared subjects' test performance among the different categories of education level. RESULTS: A total of 50 male patients with MCI (mean age: 70.74 ± 7.87) met the inclusion criteria. There were no differences in the total scores based on education or in the subscores for visuospatial/executive function, naming, attention, abstraction and delayed recall. Language was the only domain that showed significant differences between the groups. In post-hoc analysis, differences were found between groups 1 and 3 and between groups 1 and 2. Group 1 had significantly lower scores for language. The repeat subscore for language was significantly lower in group 1 than in group 2. In fluency, there were significant differences between groups 2 and 3 and between group 1 and 3. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to analyze the applicability of the Turkish version of MoCA in populations with little education. Our results emphasize the need to adapt the language sections of this test, so it can be easily used in populations with low education levels.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.293 · 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