Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Mini-Mental State Examination reliable change indices in healthy older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Cognitive tests are used repeatedly to assess the treatment response or progression of cognitive disorders. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a valid screening test for mild cognitive impairment. The aim of our study was to establish 90% reliable change indices (RCI) for the MoCA together with the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in cognitively healthy older adults. METHOD: We analyzed 197 cognitively healthy and functional independent volunteers aged 60-94 years, who met strict inclusion criteria for four consecutive years. The RCI methods by Chelune and Hsu were used. RESULTS: For 1, 2, and 3 years, the 90% RCI for MoCA using Chelune's formula were -4 ≤, ≥4; -4 ≤, ≥4 and -5 ≤, ≥4 points, respectively, and -3 ≤, ≥3 for the MMSE each year. Ninety percent RCI for MoCA using Hsu's formula ranged from -6 to 0, respectively, and +3 to +8 dependent on the baseline MoCA. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated RCI for the MoCA and MMSE in a 3-year time period that can be used for the estimation of cognitive decline or improvement in clinical settings. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".