A New Instrument Combines Cognitive and Social Functioning Items for Detecting Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia in Parkinson’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The commonly used screening tests for Parkinson’s disease (PD) are the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), both of which only focus on cognitive function. A composite assessment that considers both cognitive and social dysfunction in PD would be helpful in detecting mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and PD dementia (PDD). Objective We aimed to simplify the commonly used tools and combine cognitive and social functioning tests to detect early MCI and PDD. Materials and Methods A total of 166 participants (84 PD patients and 82 healthy) were recruited who completed the MMSE, MoCA, PD social functioning scale (PDSFS), clock drawing test, activities of daily living, comprehensive neuropsychological assessment (e.g., executive, attention, language, memory, and visuospatial functions), and movement disorder society (MDS)-unified PD rating scale. According to the MDS diagnostic criteria, the patients were grouped into PD-nonMCI, PD-MCI, or PDD. Results To detect PD-MCI, the optimal cut-off scores for the simplified MoCA and the combined test were 9 and 35. The discrimination values measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of the two tests were 0.767 ( p < 0.001) and 0.790 ( p < 0.001). When the simplified MoCA was 7 or the combined test 30, the patients would be classified as having PDD. The AUCs of the two tests were 0.846 ( p < 0.001) and 0.794 ( p = 0.003). Conclusion We suggest considering both cognitive and social functions when detecting PD-MCI and PDD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".