MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Application of the Chinese version of the Addenbrooke's cognitive examination-III in presbycusis with mild cognitive impairment

2019· article· en· W3030648436 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Juebo Yu, Haizhou Zheng, Yuanling Zhuang, Zexing Cheng, Shen Yonghua

Bibliographic record

VenueZhongguo jiceng yiyao · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePresbycusisCognitionCognitive impairmentCronbach's alphaAudiologyMontreal Cognitive AssessmentReceiver operating characteristicOutpatient clinicPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatryClinical psychologyPsychometricsHearing loss

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To explore the reliability, validity and best cut-off value of Chinese version Addenbrooke's cognitive examination-Ⅲ(ACE-Ⅲ) in presbycusis patients with mild cognitive impairment(MCI). Methods A total of 43 presbycusis patients with mild cognitive impairment, 61 presbycusis patients with normal cognitive impairment and 60 healthy controls treated in outpatient clinic of department of otolaryngology in the Affiliated Hospital of Yangzhou University from January 2016 to October 2017 were enrolled.The Chinese version of mini mental state examination(MMSE), Montreal cognitive assessment(MoCA) and ACE-Ⅲ were used to evaluate cognitive function of subjects.The reliability and validity of the ACE-Ⅲ were analyzed with the SPSS 21.0, and the cut-off point was confirmed with the receiver operating characteristic(ROC) curve analysis, and the value of the scale questionnaire in the diagnosis of presbycusis patients with MCI was assessed. Results Chinese version of ACE-Ⅲ had betler feasiblity, and the receiving rate, recovery rate and effivience were 100.0%, 100.0% and 94.9%, respetively.The Cronbach's alpha, split-half reliability and intraclass correlation coefficient were 0.870(P<0.05), 0.874(P<0.05) and 0.880(P<0.05), respectively.The patients in MCI group got a lower score in the sub-scale of attention/orientation, memory, verbal fluency, language and visual space of ACE-Ⅲ compared with those in NCI group and healthy control group, and the differences were statistically significant (F=48.042, 46.594, 35.442, 19.374, 256.19, 140.319, all P<0.001). The criteria validity calculated between the Chinese version of ACE-Ⅲ and MMSE was 0.802 (P<0.001). Factor analysis of the construct validity showed that the 26 items were classed into five domains.Every domain was sensitive and effective to discriminate between patients and healthy individuals(P<0.05). The Chinese version of ACE-Ⅲ showed significantly correlation with the total scores of MoCA(r=0.802, P<0, 001). When the cut-off value for diagnosis was 86.5, the largest area under the ROC curve for the Chinese version of ACE-Ⅲ was 0.98(95% CI: 0.897-0.996). The relative sensitivity and specificity were 100.0% and 95.0%, respectively. Conclusion The Chinese version of ACE-Ⅲ had better internal consistency, reliability and validity, and is applicable for MCI assessment in elderly patients with presbycusis.Patients with presbycusis can be considered to have cognitive dysfunction with score of 86.5 by using this questionnaire. Key words: Presbycusis; Cognition disorders; Addenbrooke's cognitive examination-Ⅲ(ACE-Ⅲ); Validity; Reliability; Hearing impairment; Cronbach′s alpha

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZhongguo jiceng yiyaoSame topicVestibular and auditory disordersFrench-language works237,207