The items in the Chinese version of the Montreal cognitive assessment basic discriminate among different severities of Alzheimer’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To determine whether items of the Chinese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Basic (MoCA-BC) could discriminate among cognitively normal controls (NC), and those with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), mild Alzheimer's disease (AD), and moderate-severe (AD), as well as their sensitivity and specificity. METHODS: MCI (n = 456), mild AD (n = 502) and moderate-severe AD (n = 102) patients were recruited from the memory clinic, Huashan Hospital, Shanghai, China. NC (n = 329) were recruited from health checkup outpatients. Five MoCA-BC item scores were collected in interviews. RESULTS: The MoCA-BC orientation test had high sensitivity and specificity for discrimination among MCI, mild AD and moderate-severe AD. The delayed recall memory test had high sensitivity and specificity for MCI screening. The verbal fluency test was efficient for detecting MCI and differentiating AD severity. CONCLUSIONS: Various items of the MoCA-BC can identify MCI patients early and identify the severity of dementia.
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".