Standardised results of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) for neurocognitive screening in a Chilean population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Population ageing poses a challenge for countries in preventing and detecting neurodegenerative disorders. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a short, simple, valid, and reliable screening test, assesses general cognitive status, and is useful in public health contexts. This study aims to normalise and standardise the MoCA test for the Chilean population. We performed a descriptive, correlational validation study of the MoCA test, using a sample including 526 healthy individuals of both sexes, aged between 18 and 90 years, from the north, centre, and south of Chile. We analysed the effects of age, education level, and sex on MoCA performance. Age and education level had a significant impact on general cognitive performance, as determined by MoCA score. Age, education, and sex account for 1%-7% of variance. The mean (standard deviation) score for the total sample was 24.04 (3.22), whereas the normal range originally defined for the instrument is 26-30 points. Older adults with less formal education presented poorer results and lower cognitive performance. We propose a protocol for evaluating results by percentiles and scores for different age ranges, and an individual normalised scalar score. We present normative data for the MoCA test in the Chilean population, and propose cut-off points for different age ranges to discriminate normal cognitive performance from neurocognitive disorders; results are adjusted for education level. This proposal would assist in the use of the test and reduce the rate of false positives. El envejecimiento poblacional implica un desafío para los países respecto a prevenir y detectar trastornos neurodegenerativos. El Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), test de cribado breve, de simple aplicación, válido y confiable, evalúa el estado cognitivo general, siendo útil en contextos de salud pública. El estudio busca normalizar y estandarizar el test MoCA para población chilena. Se presenta estudio de validación para prueba diagnóstica de tipo descriptivo y correlacional, se evaluó a 526 sujetos, hombres y mujeres, de entre 18 y 90 años, sanos, del norte, centro y sur de Chile, analizando: el efecto de la edad, nivel educativo y sexo, para rendimiento de MoCA. Se demuestra un efecto significativo de la edad y el nivel educativo sobre el rendimiento cognitivo general según MoCA. La edad, educación y sexo explican 1-7% de la varianza. El rendimiento cognitivo medio del total de la muestra fue de 24,04 ± 3,22, para un rango definido originalmente por el instrumento de 26 puntos sobre 30. Los adultos mayores con menor educación formal presentaron bajos resultados y menor rendimiento cognitivo. Se propone protocolo de evaluación de resultados en percentiles y puntuaciones por rango de edad y puntuación escalar normalizada individual. Se presentan datos normativos de MoCA según las características sociodemográficas chilenas y puntos de corte propuestos para discriminar el rendimiento cognitivo normal de trastornos neurocognitivos según rangos de edad, ajustando los resultados al nivel educacional, la propuesta permitiría facilitar el uso del instrumento y disminuir la aparición de falsos positivos.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".