MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2781535894 · doi:10.1002/gps.4846

Converting MMSE to MoCA and MoCA 5‐minute protocol in an educationally heterogeneous sample with stroke or transient ischemic attack

2018· article· en· W2781535894 on OpenAlexaffabout
Adrian Wong, Sandra E. Black, Stanley Yiu, Lisa Au, Alexander Yuk Lun Lau, Yannie Soo, Anne Chan, Thomas Leung, Ka Sing Wong, Timothy Kwok, Theodore C.K. Cheung, Kam‐Tat Leung, Bonnie Lam, Joseph Kwan, Vincent Mok

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentReceiver operating characteristicStroke (engine)CognitionCognitive impairmentMini–Mental State ExaminationPsychologyAudiologyMedicineInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is psychometrically superior over the Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE) for cognitive screening in stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). It is free for clinical and research use. The objective of this study is to convert scores from the MMSE to MoCA and MoCA-5-minute protocol (MoCA-5 min) and to examine the ability of the converted scores in detecting cognitive impairment after stroke or TIA. METHODS: A total of 904 patients were randomly divided into training (n = 623) and validation (n = 281) samples matched for demography and cognition. MMSE scores were converted to MoCA and MoCA-5 min using (1) equipercentile method with log-linear smoothing and (2) Poisson regression adjusting for age and education. Receiver operating characteristics curve analysis was used to examine the ability of the converted scores in differentiating patients with cognitive impairment. RESULTS: The mean education was 5.8 (SD = 4.6; ranged 0-20) years. The entire spectrum of MMSE scores was converted to MoCA and MoCA-5 min using equipercentile method. Relationship between MMSE and MoCA scores was confounded by age and education, and a conversion equation with adjustment for age and education was derived. In the validation sample, the converted scores differentiated cognitively impaired patients with area under receiver operating characteristics curve 0.826 to 0.859. CONCLUSION: We provided 2 methods to convert scores from the MMSE to MoCA and MoCA-5 min based on a large sample of patients with stroke or TIA having a wide range of education and cognitive levels. The converted scores differentiated patients with cognitive impairment after stroke or TIA with high accuracy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.354 · 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

Citations36
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Geriatric PsychiatrySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207