Mild Cognitive Impairment in Republic of Georgia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The goal of this study was to estimate the prevalence of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in Georgia. Method: A population-based study was conducted using Georgian version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and its cognitive domain index score. Results: Of the initial cohort of 1,000 subjects, 851 met inclusion criteria. The prevalence of MCI was 13.3%, and it was associated with age >65 years (odds ratio [OR] = 4.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [3.00, 6.75]), urban residence (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = [0.33, 0.88]), lower education (OR = 3.99, 95% CI = [2.66, 5.93]), and hypertension (OR = 2.51, 95% CI = [1.68, 3.76]), while amnestic MCI was documented in 9.3%, with higher risk in older subjects (OR = 2.69, 95% CI = [1.66, 4.20]), and diabetics (OR = 2.69, 95% CI = [1.25, 5.98]). Conclusion: In this first population-based study of MCI in Georgia, prevalence was comparable with those reported from the United States and Europe. Observed association of MCI with cardiovascular risk factors has important clinical implication for dementia prevention in Georgia.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".