Predictive Value of the Cognitive Performance Test (CPT) for Staging Function and Fitness to Drive in People With Neurocognitive Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Cognitive Performance Test (CPT) is a standardized occupational therapy assessment that examines cognitive integration with functioning in an instrumental activities of daily living context. Conventional cognitive measures provide diagnostic utility but do not fully address the functional implications. Ninety-one veterans diagnosed with cognitive impairment were evaluated. We compared the predictive value of the CPT with the Large Allen Cognitive Level Screen (LACLS), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) for the need to retire from driving versus ability to pass an on-road exam. Measures were also analyzed by diagnostic classification. CPT correctly classified a mild versus major neurocognitive disorder, whereas MMSE, MoCA, and LACLS did not differentiate the groups. A CPT cutoff score of <4.7/5.6 showed 89% sensitivity for failing the road exam and 75% specificity for ability to pass. CPT discriminated functional level in neurocognitive disorders and had better predictive value for fitness to drive compared with conventional cognitive measures.
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 | 0.000 | 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".