MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4306382084 · doi:10.3390/ijerph192013302

The Hong Kong Grocery Shopping Dialog Task (HK-GSDT): A Quick Screening Test for Neurocognitive Disorders

2022· article· en· W4306382084 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xianmin Gong, Patrick C. M. Wong, Helene H. Fung, Vincent Mok, Timothy Kwok, Jean Woo, Ka Ho Wong, Helen Meng

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChinese University of Hong KongResearch Grants Council, University Grants Committee
KeywordsNeurocognitiveCognitionCognitive testTest (biology)Stroop effectMedicinePsychologyTask (project management)Effects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Hong Kong Grocery Shopping Dialog Task (HK-GSDT) is a short and easy-to-administer cognitive test developed for quickly screening neurocognitive disorders (NCDs). In the test, participants are instructed to do a hypothetical instrumental activity of daily living task of purchasing ingredients for a dish from a grocery store and verbally describe the specific shopping procedures. The current study aimed to validate the test with a sample of 545 Hong Kong older adults (58.8% female; aged 73.4 ± 8.37 years), including 464 adults with normal cognitive function, 39 with mild NCD, and 42 with major NCD. Demographic characteristics (i.e., sex, age, education) and clinical diagnosis of cognitive states (i.e., major NCD, mild NCD, and normal aging) were collected. Cognitive functioning was measured using the HK-GSDT and several standardized NCD-screening tests. The results showed good reliability (i.e., internal consistency) and structural validity in the HK-GSDT. It discriminated among different cognitive conditions, particularly between major NCDs and the other conditions, as effectively as did the existing standardized neurocognitive tests (e.g., Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Hong Kong List Learning Test). Moreover, the HK-GSDT explained additional variance of cognitive condition on top of those standardized neurocognitive tests. These results indicate that the HK-GSDT can be used alone, or in combination with other tests, to screen for NCDs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health→Same topicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism→French-language works237,207→