MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of using Montreal Cognitive Assessment in patients with Parkinson' s disease with cognitive impairment

2011· article· en· W3029464646 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ling Chen, Yang Wang, Ning Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueChin J Neurol · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentRating scaleHamdParkinson's diseaseHamilton Anxiety Rating ScaleInternal medicineCognitionPsychologyAnxietyPhysical therapyMedicinePsychiatryDiseaseCognitive impairmentDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To examine the application of Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in Parkinson' s disease (PD) patients with normal general cognitive function by Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) evaluation.Methods PD patients were examined with MMSE, and those having a normal ageand education-adjusted MMSE score were included in the further study of MoCA testing.The patients with MoCA score not less than 26 were selected into normal control PD-NC group, and the patients with less than 26 into cognitive impaired PD-CI group.Scores of MoCA subtests were used in PD-CI group and PD-NC group to characterize cognitive changes in PD patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI).MoCA score in PD-CI group used as dependent variable, and sex, educational level, age, course of disease, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA), Self-rating depression Scale (SDS), Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) and Unified Parkinson' s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) were used as independent variable, the risk factors of CI in PD patients was analysed by Linear Regression Analysis.Results There are 52.6% (112/213) PD patients with MMSE ≥ 26 while their MoCA < 26.Significant differences were observed in subtests of MoCA in visuospatial, executive, naming, attention,language, abstract, delayed recall and orientation between PD-CI group and PD-NC group (all P <0.01).Univariate and multivariate regression analysis showed that educational level is the most significant factor in PD-CI (OR:0.72, 95% CI 0.64-0.81, P < 0.05).Conclusions There is a high proportion of PD patients whose MMSE test showed normal but MoCA test showed cognitive impairment.MoCA examination was used to detect cognitive function of PD patients.Furthermore we suggest consider the education level in PD patients when evaluate their cognitive function. Key words: Parkinson disease; Cognition disorders; Neuropsychological tests; Mental status schedule

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChin J NeurolSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207