MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183705190 · doi:10.3390/jpm11080688

Tele-Neuropsychological Assessment of Alzheimer’s Disease

2021· review· en· W3183705190 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anna Carotenuto, Enea Traini, Angiola Maria Fasanaro, Gopi Battineni, Francesco Amenta

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Personalized Medicine · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelemedicineCINAHLNeuropsychologyDementiaMedicineMEDLINETelehealthTest (biology)DiseasePsychiatryCognitionPsychological interventionHealth carePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Because of the new pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), the demand for telemedicine and telemonitoring solutions has been exponentially raised. Because of its special advantage to treat patients in an emergency without physical presence at a hospital via video conferencing, telemedicine has been used to overcome distance barriers and to improve access to special domains like neurology. In these pandemic times, telemedicine has been also employed as a support for the diagnosis and treatment of adult-onset dementia disorders including Alzheimer's disease. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we carried out a systematic literature analysis to clarify if the neuropsychological tests traditionally employed in face-to-face (FTF) contexts are reliable via telemedicine. METHODS: A systematic literature search for the past 20 years (2001-2020) was carried out through the medical databases PubMed (Medline) and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). The quality assessment was conducted by adopting the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) and only studies with a NOS ≥ 7 were included in this review. RESULTS: The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) results do not differ when tests are administered in the traditional FTF modality or by videoconference, and only negligible minor changes in the scoring system were noticeable. Other neuropsychological tests used to support the diagnosis of AD and dementia such as the Token Test, the Comprehension of Words and Phrases (ACWP), the Controlled Oral Word Association Test showed high reliability between the two modalities considered. No differences in the reliability concerning the living setting or education of the subjects were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The MMSE, which is the main screening test for dementia, can be administered via telemedicine with minor adaptation in the scoring system. Telemedicine use for other neuropsychological tests also resulted in general reliability and enough accuracy. Cognitive assessment by videoconference is accepted and appreciated and therefore can be used for dementia diagnosis in case of difficulties to performing FTF assessments. This approach can be useful given a personalized medicine approach for the treatment of adult-onset dementia disorders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.357 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations45
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Personalized MedicineSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207