Diagnostic Validity of the Smart Aging Serious Game: An Innovative Tool for Digital Phenotyping of Mild Neurocognitive Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Smart Aging Serious Game (SASG) is an ecologically-based digital platform used in mild neurocognitive disorders. Considering the higher risk of developing dementia for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and vascular cognitive impairment (VCI), their digital phenotyping is crucial. A new understanding of MCI and VCI aided by digital phenotyping with SASG will challenge current differential diagnosis and open the perspective of tailoring more personalized interventions. OBJECTIVE: To confirm the validity of SASG in detecting MCI from healthy controls (HC) and to evaluate its diagnostic validity in differentiating between VCI and HC. METHODS: 161 subjects (74 HC: 37 males, 75.47±2.66 mean age; 60 MCI: 26 males, 74.20±5.02; 27 VCI: 13 males, 74.22±3.43) underwent a SASG session and a neuropsychological assessment (Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test, Trail Making Test). A multi-modal statistical approach was used: receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves comparison, random forest (RF), and logistic regression (LR) analysis. RESULTS: SASG well captured the specific cognitive profiles of MCI and VCI, in line with the standard neuropsychological measures. ROC analyses revealed high diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of SASG and MoCA (AUCs > 0.800) in detecting VCI versus HC and MCI versus HC conditions. An acceptable to excellent classification accuracy was found for MCI and VCI (HC versus VCI; RF: 90%, LR: 91%. HC versus MCI; RF: 75%; LR: 87%). CONCLUSION: SASG allows the early assessment of cognitive impairment through ecological tasks and potentially in a self-administered way. These features make this platform suitable for being considered a useful digital phenotyping tool, allowing a non-invasive and valid neuropsychological evaluation, with evident implications for future digital-health trails and rehabilitation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".