Integration of an Objective Cognitive Assessment Into a Prognostic Index for 5‐Year Mortality Prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Prognostic indices rarely include cognition. We determined if a comprehensive cognitive screen or brief individual items were associated with improved mortality predictions of a widely used prognostic index. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The National Social Life Health and Aging Project Wave 2, a nationally representative, cross-sectional, in-home survey conducted in 2010 to 2011 on 3,199 community-dwelling adults aged 60 to 99 years. MEASUREMENTS: Cognition was measured using a Survey-Adapted Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-SA) grouped into three screened categories: screen normal (≥24 points), screen positive for mild cognitive impairment (18-23 points), and screen positive for dementia (<18 points). Single-item cognitive measures included clock-draw and five-word delayed recall. We constructed a modified Lee Prognostic Index (range = 0-18 points) based on age, behavior, function, and comorbidities shown to predict long-term mortality. We used logistic regression and the fraction of new information provided to determine if each cognitive measure improved the Lee index's 5-year mortality prediction. RESULTS: The sample was 54% female and had a mean age of 72 years, MoCA-SA score of 22 (SD = 4.5), and Lee index of 7 (SD = 3). Regression analysis indicated the MoCA-SA modestly improved the Lee index's mortality prediction (P < .001; fraction of new information provided = 0.06); for low Lee index scores (<4 points), the absolute mortality rate difference was 7% by cognitive status; and for higher Lee index scores (4-7 points or 8-12 points), the absolute mortality rate difference was 15% by cognitive status. The clock-draw and delayed-recall items added similar value to mortality predictions as the longer MoCA-SA. Cognition had the third highest fraction of new information of all 13 Lee index items. CONCLUSION: Incorporating a brief measure of cognition into a modified Lee index, even with single items, resulted in more accurate 5-year mortality risk predictions. Cognition should be included in prognostic calculators in older adults given its independent association with mortality risk. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1796-1802, 2020.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".