MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2724711696 · doi:10.25419/rcsi.10810340

The Relationship Between Performance On Cognitive Screening Tests And Everyday Functioning In Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment

2016· article· en· W2724711696 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elaine Scally

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive impairmentPsychologyCognitive skillCognitionEveryday lifeDevelopmental psychologyCognitive psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<strong>Introduction:</strong> Occupational therapists (OTs) play an important role in evaluating the cognitive and functional abilities of older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in the acute hospital setting. Cognitive screening tools such as the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination (ACE-III) are regularly administered by acute hospital OTs to assist in predicting the functional capacities of individuals with MCI. However findings from clinical practice show that performance on cognitive screening tools is not always consistent with functional task performance. <strong>Aims and Objectives:</strong> The aim of the research was to explore the relationship between cognitive test performance and instrumental activity of daily living (IADL) function in older adults with MCI in the acute hospital setting. The objectives of the study were to determine which cognitive screening tool (MoCA or ACE-III) was most strongly related to IADL function, to determine the relationship between individual cognitive subdomains of the MoCA/ACE-III and IADL function and to explore the influence of various cognitive and demographic variables on IADL function. <strong>Methods:</strong> Forty older adults with MCI were recruited from an acute hospital setting for this cross-sectional study. All participants completed cognitive screening tests (MoCA and ACE-III) and an objective measure of everyday functioning (Executive Function Performance Test, EFPT). Correlation and regression analyses were conducted to explore the relationship between cognitive test performance and functional capacity. <strong>Results:</strong> The mean (±SD) age of the participants was 79.9 (±8.1) years with 52.5% (n=21) being female. A low correlation was found between EFPT total scores and MoCA total scores (r= -0.22, p <strong>Conclusion:</strong> Results demonstrated low-moderate relationships between performance on the MoCA/ ACE-III cognitive screening tests and IADL function as measured by the EFPT. It is evident that performance on cognitive screening tests alone does not provide the clinician with a definitive evaluation of the functional abilities of older adults with MCI in the acute hospital setting. <strong>Implications of Findings</strong> This research provides the clinician with a better understanding of the relationship between performance on cognitive screening tests and functional abilities in older adults with MCI in the acute hospital setting. It highlights the importance of examining cognitive subdomains of screening tests rather than just the overall score. It also supports the value of functional assessment for individuals with MCI. This study demonstrated that the ACE-III was more strongly related to IADL function than the MoCA and this indicates that the ACE-III should be used when assessing individuals with 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.000
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHealth and Well-being StudiesFrench-language works237,207