Developing the Canadian Indigenous Cognitive Assessment for Use With Indigenous Older Anishinaabe Adults in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background and Objectives Dementia is a growing public health issue for aging Indigenous populations. Current cognitive assessments present varying degrees of cultural, educational, and language bias, impairing their application in Indigenous communities. Our goal is to provide Anishinaabe communities in Canada with a brief cognitive test that can be administered within the community setting by community health workers or professionals. The purpose of this study was to adapt the Kimberly Indigenous Cognitive Assessment (KICA) for use as a brief cognitive test with Anishinaabe populations in Canada. Research Design and Methods We used a community-based participatory research approach coupled with two-eyed seeing to provide an equitable space for Indigenous knowledge. Adaptation of the KICA was accomplished over 22 months using an iterative cycle of monthly consultations between an 11-member expert Anishinaabe language group (EALG) and the investigators, with ad hoc consultations with an Indigenous Elder, a community advisory council, and the KICA authors. Face validity was established with two pilot studies using cognitive interviewing with Indigenous older adults (n = 15) and a focus group consultation with local health professionals (n = 7). Results Each question of the KICA was scrutinized by the EALG for cultural appropriateness, language and translation, and cultural safety. Every domain required adaptation to reflect cultural values, specificity of language, tone, and a culturally safe approach. Orientation, verbal comprehension and fluency, praxis, and naming domains required the most adaptations. The first pilot for face validity resulted in additional changes; the second confirmed satisfactory adaptation of all changes. Discussion and Implications The research resulted in the new Canadian Indigenous Cognitive Assessment. The findings reveal important cultural and linguistic considerations for cross-cultural cognitive assessment in Indigenous contexts. This new culturally appropriate and safe brief cognitive test may improve case finding accuracy and lead to earlier diagnosis and improved dementia care for Indigenous peoples.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".