Dementia Screening Tools In General Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jankowska Paula, Jankowski Krzysztof, Rudnicka Drożak Ewa. Dementia screening tools in General Practice. Journal of Education, Health and Sport. 2018;8(6):237-245. eISNN 2391-8306. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1284131 http://ojs.ukw.edu.pl/index.php/johs/article/view/5562 https://pbn.nauka.gov.pl/sedno-webapp/works/866706 The journal has had 7 points in Ministry of Science and Higher Education parametric evaluation. Part b item 1223 (26/01/2017). 1223 Journal of Education, Health and Sport eissn 2391-8306 7 © The Authors 2018; This article is published with open access at Licensee Open Journal Systems of Kazimierz Wielki University in Bydgoszcz, Poland Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author (s) and source are credited. This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non commercial license Share alike. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) which permits unrestricted, non commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited. The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper. Received: 02.05.2018. Revised: 18.05.2018. Accepted: 06.06.2018. Dementia screening tools in General Practice Paula Jankowska, Krzysztof Jankowski, Ewa Rudnicka Drożak Chair and Department of Family Medicine, Medical University of Lublin ABSTRACT Introduction Global and local societies experience problem of changes in demographic structure. The demographic transformation will be associated with increasing number of health, social and economic problems. One of them is dementia, commonly diagnosed among people over 65 years of age. Screening for dementia allows earlier diagnosis and treatment of disease, providing better long-time effects. General practitioner is one of the healthcare professionals most commonly seen by patients with their everyday health problems. Thus, doctors from this branch of medicine are mostly entitled to perform screening for many diseases including dementia. There are many dementia screening tools available. Objective The objective of this work is to present dementia screening tool suitable to use in general practice environment. Results The most widely used is Mini Mental State Examination test. It is used both for initial assessment and for tracking the dynamics of changes over time. Other test as Montreal Cognitive Assessments test or Clock Drawing Test, Short Test of Mental Status are screening tools for detecting mild cognitive impairment. In general practices some other tools as GPCOG, Mini-Cog and MIS can be used. They are recommended due to simplicity of performance and short time required to perform examination. Conclusions Many tests are recently developed to perform screening for dementia. In general practice environment only tests with high reliability and short time of performance can be implemented. MMSE is the most widely used questionnaire in clinical setting. Apart from this tool, it is suggested to use GPCOG, Mini-Cog, MIS as time of their application is highly adjusted to conditions of general practice and have high sensitivity and specificity. Keyword: Dementia, Cognition, General Practice, Prevention and Control
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 | 0.006 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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".