Identification of Mild Cognitive Impairment Among Chinese Based on Multiple Spoken Tasks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies explored the use of noninvasive biomarkers of speech and language for the detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Yet, most of them employed single task which might not have adequately captured all aspects of their cognitive functions. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to achieve the state-of-the-art accuracy in detecting individuals with MCI using multiple spoken tasks and uncover task-specific contributions with a tentative interpretation of features. METHODS: Fifty patients clinically diagnosed with MCI and 60 healthy controls completed three spoken tasks (picture description, semantic fluency, and sentence repetition), from which multidimensional features were extracted to train machine learning classifiers. With a late-fusion configuration, predictions from multiple tasks were combined and correlated with the participants' cognitive ability assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Statistical analyses on pre-defined features were carried out to explore their association with the diagnosis. RESULTS: The late-fusion configuration could effectively boost the final classification result (SVM: F1 = 0.95; RF: F1 = 0.96; LR: F1 = 0.93), outperforming each individual task classifier. Besides, the probability estimates of MCI were strongly correlated with the MoCA scores (SVM: -0.74; RF: -0.71; LR: -0.72). CONCLUSION: Each single task tapped more dominantly to distinct cognitive processes and have specific contributions to the prediction of MCI. Specifically, picture description task characterized communications at the discourse level, while semantic fluency task was more specific to the controlled lexical retrieval processes. With greater demands on working memory load, sentence repetition task uncovered memory deficits through modified speech patterns in the reproduced sentences.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".