Validation of SATURN, a free, electronic, self‐administered cognitive screening test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cognitive screening is limited by clinician time and variability in administration and scoring. We therefore developed Self-Administered Tasks Uncovering Risk of Neurodegeneration (SATURN), a free, public-domain, self-administered, and automatically scored cognitive screening test, and validated it on inexpensive (<$100) computer tablets. METHODS: SATURN is a 30-point test including orientation, word recall, and math items adapted from the Saint Louis University Mental Status test, modified versions of the Stroop and Trails tasks, and other assessments of visuospatial function and memory. English-speaking neurology clinic patients and their partners 50 to 89 years of age were given SATURN, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and a brief survey about test preferences. For patients recruited from dementia clinics (n = 23), clinical status was quantified with the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) scale. Care partners (n = 37) were assigned CDR = 0. RESULTS: = -0.83 and -0.86, respectively). Statistically, neither test was superior. Most participants (83%) reported that SATURN was easy to use, and most either preferred SATURN over the MoCA (47%) or had no preference (32%). DISCUSSION: Performance on SATURN-a fully self-administered and freely available (https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.02v6wwpzr) cognitive screening test-is well-correlated with MoCA and CDR scores.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".