MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2472057564 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2015.06.1813

P4‐107: Feasibility and outcomes of a national memory screening day at a community senior mental health clinic

2015· article· en· W2472057564 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joie Molden, Brenna N. Renn, Ashita S. Gurnani, Tracie Nicoll, Caitlin J. Tyrrell, Emily C. Luther, Brandon E. Gavett

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMemory clinicPsychomotor learningMemory impairmentMental healthPsychologyMedicineGerontologyCognitive impairmentPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early detection of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other dementias is advantageous for treatment planning and preparation for future decision-making. Easily accessible community memory screening is one method for early AD detection; however, the feasibility and community desire for such screening is not well established. We present development, feasibility, and outcomes from a free clinic-based cognitive screening as part of National Memory Screening Day. Free memory screens were advertised via the local newspaper, word-of-mouth, and at regional events and organizations serving older adults. Screening occurred at a community senior mental health clinic. Assessments for the memory screening were chosen to favor test sensitivity over specificity in order to maximize detection of possible cognitive impairment. Tests were also selected to cover multiple domains of cognition including memory, processing and psychomotor speed, language, and global cognition within a 20-minute battery. Sensitivity and specificity estimates were used to derive likelihood ratios, which were subsequently combined to provide an estimate of risk of cognitive impairment based on an estimated base rate of 25%. Presence of self- and informant-reported memory concerns factored into the risk calculation. A total of 18 older adults ranging in age from 57 to 87 (M = 70.22, SD = 8.69) participated. The sample was highly educated (M = 16.28 years of education) and included equal numbers of male and female participants. Sixteen participants (89%) reported concerns about their own memory, while six participants (33%) reported that others had expressed concerns about their memory. Mean Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score was 25.05 (SD = 3.47), and recommendations for neuropsychological follow-up were made for four participants (22% of the sample). This screening yielded clinically relevant information regarding potential risk for cognitive impairment using a brief, easily administered battery. The service identified just over one fifth of the sample as high risk of cognitive impairment, potentially increasing the likelihood of early detection of AD or other dementias for individuals whose risk may otherwise have gone unidentified until later in the disease course. Such a memory screening day represents a valuable public health outreach for older adults at risk of dementia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→