Characterizing neuropsychiatric symptoms in subjects referred to dementia clinics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) of subjects classified as not cognitively impaired (NCI), cognitively impaired-not demented (CIND), and dementia. METHODS: A Canadian Cohort Study of Cognitive Impairment and Related Dementias (ACCORD) is a longitudinal investigation of individuals referred to eight Canadian dementia centers for evaluation of cognitive impairment and neurobehavioral symptoms. Of the inception cohort of 804 subjects for whom the informant-based Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) was completed at study entry, 35 were classified as NCI, 193 as CIND, and 576 as dementia. The three diagnostic groups were compared on each of the 12 NPI items. Within each diagnostic group, comparisons were also made between symptomatic (NPS+; total score > 1) and asymptomatic (NPS-; total score = 0) subjects on measures of general cognitive status and functional disability. A subset of the NCI and CIND individuals were also compared on a comprehensive neuropsychological test battery. RESULTS: There was at least one NPI item reported in 60% of subjects with NCI, 74% with CIND, and 89% with dementia. The item scores for delusions, hallucinations, agitation, apathy, disinhibition, aberrant motor behavior, and problems with appetite were greater in dementia subjects than in NCI or CIND. There were no significant differences between subjects with NCI and CIND on any NPI item. For each diagnostic group, NPS+ subjects were more impaired on functional but not neuropsychological measures. CONCLUSIONS: Across all levels of cognition, neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) are an important feature in individuals referred to dementia clinics. The current data suggest that NPS may precede cognitive deficits in individuals classified as not cognitively impaired and cognitively impaired-not demented.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".