MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138242973 · doi:10.1155/2021/5510093

Modifying the Mini-Cog to Screen for Cognitive Impairment in Nonliterate Individuals

2021· article· en· W3138242973 on OpenAlexafffund
Shambhu Prasad Adhikari, Rubee Dev, Soo Borson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Alzheimer s Disease · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsCogMedicineCognitive impairmentCognitionGerontologyDementiaPsychiatryArtificial intelligenceDiseaseInternal medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives. The Mini-Cog, a rapid, valid, and reliable screening tool for cognitive impairment, consists of 3-word recall and an executive clock drawing test (CDT). However, CDT requires at least basic literacy and cultural exposure to analog clocks, conditions not met in many population groups around the world. We developed a modification of the Mini-Cog (MMC) for use with nonliterate and literate individuals. Methods. Participants were adults (≥60 years) with no neurological diagnosis, with known cognitive impairment due to stroke, Parkinsonism, traumatic brain injury, or Alzheimer’s disease, and whose family members were able to read and write. We replaced the CDT with two tasks of everyday life: a serial subtraction task or a multistep performance task. Family members rated the acceptability and feasibility of the Mini-Cog versions using a 6-point scale and completed a proxy-rated cognitive staging tool, the Dementia Severity Rating Scale (DSRS). Spearman’s rho, Mann-Whitney <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"> <a:mi>U</a:mi> </a:math> , and chi-square tests were used to evaluate group differences and associations between measures. Results. Data were collected from 63 participants ( <c:math xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2"> <c:mn>75</c:mn> <c:mi>%</c:mi> <c:mo>≥</c:mo> <c:mn>60</c:mn> <c:mtext> </c:mtext> <c:mtext>years</c:mtext> </c:math> , 67% nonliterate). Literacy was associated with CDT (chi-square strength 0.9, <e:math xmlns:e="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M3"> <e:mi>p</e:mi> <e:mo>&lt;</e:mo> <e:mn>0.001</e:mn> </e:math> ). Both MMC versions correlated with DSRS in healthy adults and patients (rho 0.6-0.7, <g:math xmlns:g="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M4"> <g:mi>p</g:mi> <g:mo>&lt;</g:mo> <g:mn>0.05</g:mn> </g:math> ). In literate individuals, the acceptability and feasibility of CDT and both alternate distractors were similarly high (5/6). Conclusions. Two alternate distractor tasks may successfully replace CDT in the Mini-Cog. The MMC versions are promising and deserve further study as screening tools for cognitive impairment in larger and more fully characterized samples.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.673
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Alzheimer s DiseaseSame topicNeuroscience and Music PerceptionFrench-language works237,207