Application of Montreal cognitive assessment scale in assessment of mild cognitive impairment
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To study the application of Chinese version Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) scale in assessment of mild cognitive impairment(MCI).Methods One hundred and twenty-eight MCI patients served as a MCI group and 101 healthy subjects served as a control group in this study.Their cognitive function was assessed according to the MoCA and MMSE scales.Results The total score on the MoCA scale was positively correlated with that on the MoCA scale in MCI group and control group(r=0.352,P0.05;r=0.765,P0.01).The score was significantly lower on the MoCA scale than on the MMSE scale(P0.01).The total score and other subitem scores on the MoCA scale were significantly lower in MCI group than in control group(P0.05).The sensitivity and specificity of MoCA and MMSE scales were 97.66% and 95.05%,32.03%and 100%,respectively,for the detection of MCI.Conclusion The total score on the MoCA scale is related with that on the MMSE scale in MCI patients and healthy subjects. The sensitivity of MoCA scale is higher than that of MMSE scale in assessment of MCI.
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 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) | 0.001 | 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 it