The Lost Years: Delay Between the Onset of Cognitive Symptoms and Clinical Assessment at a Memory Clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Early assessment of cognitive symptoms is an issue in geriatrics. This study investigated the delay from the onset of cognitive symptoms to initial clinical assessment and its associations with patients' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional retrospective study using medical chart review of 316 patients referred for assessment to a university-affiliated memory clinic. Symptom duration was self-reported by patients/carers. Severity of symptoms assessed by the MoCA and FAST instruments was compared according to delay duration (≥3 years vs. <3 years) using chi-squared tests. Logistic regression was used to determine the association between patients' characteristics and long symptom duration (≥3 years). RESULTS: =.012). They were also significantly older than 75 years (75-84 yr: OR=2.22 [95%CI: 1.11-4.41]; ≥85 yr: 4.36 [2.08-9.11]), presented more depressive symptoms (2.37 [1.40-4.02]), and were less likely to live alone (0.55 [0.31-0.96]). CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of patients had cognitive symptoms for years when initially assessed, which delayed diagnosis and management. Stigma, depression, and compensatory help from carers may contribute to this delay.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".