Demographic characteristics and neuropsychological assessments of subjective cognitive decline (SCD) (<i>plus</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since SCD (plus) was standardized, little is known about its demographic characteristics and its outcomes of neuropsychological assessments, including the SCD questionnaire 9 (SCD-Q9). OBJECTIVE: To characterize SCD (plus) by comparing the neuropsychological features among its subgroups and with normal controls (NC). Also, to explore its demographics and to understand the relation of the chief complaints and the scores of SCD-Q9. METHODS: Multistage stratified cluster random sampling was conducted to select participants. As a result, 84 NC and 517 SCD (plus) were included. SCD (plus) was further classified into several subgroups (SCD-C: concerned cognitive decline; SCD-F: complaints about SCD within the past five years; SCD-P: feeling performance being not as good as their peers; SCD+: presented> 3 of SCD (plus) features; SCD-: presented ≤ 3 of SCD (plus) features (see the diagnostic criteria for the details)) and between-group comparisons of neuropsychological scores were conducted. Point-biserial correlation and binary logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate the demographic characteristics of its subgroups. Finally, Spearman correlation was used to better understand the relation of SCD (plus) to SCD-Q9. RESULTS: (1) Scores of AVLT-LR (AVLT-LR: Auditory Verbal Learning Test-Long Delayed Recall) and MoCA-B (MoCA: Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Basic) were lower in the SCD-P group than those in the NC group, and the SCD+ group scored lower in the MoCA-B and CDT(CDT: Clock Drawing Test) than the SCD- group. (2) Females were more concerned than male participants. Individuals with lower education level felt that their cognitive performance were worse than their peers. Also, younger people might express concerns more than the more elderly. People who had complaints of SCD-P might be more likely to report SCD-C, but less likely to report SCD-F. (3) Positive correlations were found between the chief complaints of SCD (plus) and some items of SCD-Q9. CONCLUSIONS: SCD (plus) may be related to demographic factors. Individuals with SCD (plus) already exhibited cognitive impairment, which can be detected by SCD-Q9.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".