Use of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Thai Version to Discriminate Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment from Alzheimer’s Disease and Healthy Controls: Machine Learning Results
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is an effective and applicable screening instrument to confirm the diagnosis of amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) from patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and healthy controls (HCs). OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the reliability and validity of the following: (a) Thai translation of the MoCA (MoCA-Thai) and (b) delineate the key features of aMCI based on the MoCA subdomains. METHODS: This study included 60 HCs, 61 aMCI patients, and 60 AD patients. The MoCA-Thai shows adequate psychometric properties including internal consistency, concurrent validity, test-retest validity, and inter-rater reliability. RESULTS: The MoCA-Thai may be employed as a diagnostic criterion to make the diagnosis of aMCI, whereby aMCI patients are discriminated from HC with an area under the receiver-operating characteristic (AUC-ROC) curve of 0.813 and from AD patients with an AUC-ROC curve of 0.938. The best cutoff scores of the MoCA-Thai to discriminate aMCI from HC is ≤24 and from AD > 16. Neural network analysis showed that (a) aberrations in recall was the most important feature of aMCI versus HC with impairments in language and orientation being the second and third most important features and (b) aberrations in visuospatial skills and executive functions were the most important features of AD versus aMCI and that impairments in recall, language, and orientation but not attention, concentration, and working memory, further discriminated AD from aMCI. CONCLUSIONS: The MoCA-Thai is an appropriate cognitive assessment tool to be used in the Thai population for the diagnosis of aMCI and AD.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it