Identifying Key Predictors of Cognitive Dysfunction in Older People Using Supervised Machine Learning Techniques: Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Machine learning techniques, specifically classification algorithms, may be effective to help understand key health, nutritional, and environmental factors associated with cognitive function in aging populations. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to use classification techniques to identify the key patient predictors that are considered most important in the classification of poorer cognitive performance, which is an early risk factor for dementia. METHODS: Data were used from the Trinity-Ulster and Department of Agriculture study, which included detailed information on sociodemographic, clinical, biochemical, nutritional, and lifestyle factors in 5186 older adults recruited from the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, a proportion of whom (987/5186, 19.03%) were followed up 5-7 years later for reassessment. Cognitive function at both time points was assessed using a battery of tests, including the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS), with a score <70 classed as poorer cognitive performance. This study trained 3 classifiers-decision trees, Naïve Bayes, and random forests-to classify the RBANS score and to identify key health, nutritional, and environmental predictors of cognitive performance and cognitive decline over the follow-up period. It assessed their performance, taking note of the variables that were deemed important for the optimized classifiers for their computational diagnostics. RESULTS: score range 0.66-0.85), also indicating the TUG score to be of key importance, followed by blood indicators: plasma homocysteine, vitamin B6 biomarker (plasma pyridoxal-5-phosphate), and glycated hemoglobin. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that it may be possible for a health care professional to make an initial evaluation, with a high level of confidence, of the potential for cognitive dysfunction using only a few short, noninvasive questions, thus providing a quick, efficient, and noninvasive way to help them decide whether or not a patient requires a full cognitive evaluation. This approach has the potential benefits of making time and cost savings for health service providers and avoiding stress created through unnecessary cognitive assessments in low-risk patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".