184 A National Survey of Clinicians who Assess People with Suspected Dementia: Service Characteristics and Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The Irish National Dementia Strategy (2014) identified timely diagnosis and intervention as a priority area. The National Dementia Office established a Dementia Diagnostic Project to develop a framework for diagnostic services nationally. As part of preparatory work, a national survey explored baseline peri-diagnostic practice in geriatric medicine, neurology and psychiatry of old age services. Methods A survey was developed by the project steering group, piloted, and then distributed to all 86 Geriatricians, 39 Neurologists, and 34 Psychiatrists of Old Age Psychiatrists in Ireland. Two reminder e-mails were sent. Results In total, 56 clinicians responded (response rate 35%). The majority (74%) saw 1-20 people with suspected dementia (PwSD) per month. Most referrals came from General Practitioners or other physicians; but rarely from Health and Social Care Professionals. Most people were referred specifically for their memory complaint, rather than a co-morbidity. Waiting times for urgent review varied between 24 hours and 4 years; neurology services had the longest waiting times. Only 30% saw PwSD in a dedicated clinic; about the same proportion saw PwSD in their own home; or in residential care settings. About half reported assessing people with intellectual disability and suspected dementia, mainly the neurologists. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment was the most commonly used cognitive tool (89%), followed by the Addenbrook’s Cognitive Examination (56%). Only 17% commonly used functional brain imaging in diagnosis, mainly neurologists; half of respondents ‘never’ or ‘rarely’ used cerebrospinal fluid analysis. Multidisciplinary input was mainly from Occupational Therapists (61%), Psychology/Neuropsychology (52%), and Nursing disciplines (33%). When asked which discipline would most benefit their diagnostic service, neurologists all chose psychology input; geriatricians selected a range of disciplines. Conclusion The significant variability within current services who see PwSD, in terms of multidisciplinary involvement, waiting times, setting, and supporting investigations, supports the need for a national diagnostic framework.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".