Association between older adults’ functional performance and their scores on the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The paper aims to investigate if the performance of older adults on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were associated or predictive of their functional performance in a geriatric evaluation and management (GEM) inpatient hospital setting. This will inform the occupational therapy assessment and management of older adults admitted to sub-acute GEM settings. Design/methodology/approach In all, 20 participants (11 men, 9 women, mean age 82 years, SD = 6.93) were recruited from a GEM ward in an Australian hospital. Participants’ cognitive abilities were assessed using the MMSE and MoCA, and their functional performance were assessed using the Functional Independence Measure (FIM). Spearman’s rho correlations and linear regression analyses were completed. Bootstrapping was applied to the regression analyses to accommodate the small study sample size. Findings No statistically significant correlations were obtained between the total and subscale scores of the MMSE and FIM or between the total and subscale scores of the MoCA and FIM. In other words, the cognitive and functional abilities of older adults admitted to a GEM setting were not significantly associated in this study. Originality/value The findings suggest that the MoCA and the MMSE were not predictive of participants’ functional performance as measure by the FIM in a sub-acute GEM setting. Occupational therapists should be cautious when interpreting participants’ MMSE, MoCA and FIM results and not depend solely on these results in the goal setting and intervention planning processes for clients on GEM wards. Further studies are recommended to confirm these findings.
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 | 0.000 | 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".