MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2520867547 · doi:10.14423/smj.0000000000000511

Utility of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment as a Screening Test for Neurocognitive Dysfunction in Adults with Sickle Cell Disease

2016· article· en· W2520867547 on OpenAlex
Cody Cichowitz, Patrick C. Carroll, John J. Strouse, Carlton Haywood, Sophie Lanzkron

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

VenueSouthern Medical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMedicineNeurocognitiveDiseaseConfidence intervalCognitionInternal medicinePhysical therapyGerontologyPsychiatryCognitive impairment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Neurocognitive dysfunction is an important complication of sickle cell disease (SCD), but little is published on the utility of screening tests for cognitive impairment in people with the disease. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) as a screening tool and identify predictors of MoCA performance in adults with sickle cell disease. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional study of the first 100 adult patients with SCD who completed the MoCA as part of routine clinical care at the Johns Hopkins Sickle Cell Center for Adults. We abstracted demographic, laboratory, and clinical data from each participant's electronic medical record up to the date that the MoCA was administered. The factorial validity of each MoCA domain was analyzed using standard psychometric statistics. We evaluated the abstracted data for associations with the composite MoCA score and looked for independent predictors of performance using multivariable regressions. RESULTS: Components of the MoCA performed well in psychometric analyses and identified deficits in executive function that were described in other studies. Forty-six percent of participants fell below the cutoff for mild cognitive impairment. Increased education was an independent predictor of increased MoCA score (3.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5-4.7), whereas cerebrovascular accidents and chronic kidney disease were independent predictors of decreased score (-3.3, 95% CI -5.7 to -0.97 and -3.2, 95% CI -6.2 to -0.11, respectively). When analysis was restricted to patients with SCA, increased education (3.7, 95% CI 2.2-5.2) and a history of hydroxyurea therapy (2.0, 95% CI -0.022 to 4.0) were independent predictors of a higher score, whereas chronic kidney disease (-3.3, 95% CI -6.4 to -0.24) and increased aspartate transaminase (-0.045, 95% CI -0.089 to -0.0010) were independent predictors of a decreased score. CONCLUSIONS: The MoCA showed promise by identifying important cognitive deficits and associations with chronic complications and therapy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.250
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.241 · 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