Influence of Age and Education on the Performance of Elderly in the Brazilian Version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Battery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To provide normative data for the Brazilian version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-BR) and to measure the effect of sociodemographic variables on the cognitive performance of cognitively healthy elderly people. METHODS: A sample of 110 cognitively healthy individuals, aged over 65 years, with at least 4 years of schooling were recruited from 3 health care centers for the elderly in Recife, Brazil. The cognitive performance was assessed using MoCA-BR. RESULTS: The average score of these elderly people in the MoCA-BR was 23.2 ± 2.7. Their schooling correlated positively with the cognitive performance, with a Spearman's coefficient of 0.33 (p < 0.001). There was a statistically significant negative correlation between age and the cognitive performance (Spearman's rho = -0.19). The multiple linear regression model with the highest adjusted coefficient of determination was the one that included schooling and age (adjusted R2 = 0.127). CONCLUSIONS: The cognitive performance of healthy elderly was evaluated and was strongly influenced by schooling and, to a lower degree, by age.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".