Development and validation of the Montreal cognitive assessment for people with hearing impairment ( <scp>MoCA‐H</scp> )
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hearing impairment is common among older adults and affects cognitive assessments for identification of dementia which rely on good hearing function. We developed and validated a version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) for people with hearing impairment. METHODS: We adapted existing MoCA 8.1 items for people with hearing impairment by presenting instructions and stimuli in written rather than spoken format. One Attention domain and two Language domain items required substitution by alternative items. Three and four candidate items respectively were constructed and field-tested along with the items adapted to written form. We used a combination of individual item analysis and item substitution to select the set of alternative items to be included in the final form of the MoCA-H in place of the excluded original items. We then evaluated the performance and reliability of the final tool, including making any required adjustments for demographic factors. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-nine hearing-impaired participants, including 76 with normal cognition and 83 with dementia, completed the adapted version of the MoCA. A further 97 participants with normal hearing completed the standard MoCA as well as the novel items developed for the MoCA-H to assess score equivalence between the existing and alternative MoCA items and for independence from hearing impairment. Twenty-eight participants were retested between 2-4 weeks after initial testing. After the selection of optimal item set, the final MoCA-H had an area under the curve of 0.973 (95% CI 0.952-0.994). At a cut-point of 24 points or less sensitivity and specificity for dementia was 92.8% and 90.8%, respectively. The intraclass correlation for test-retest reliability was 0.92 (95%CI 0.78-0.97). CONCLUSION: The MoCA-H is a sensitive and reliable means of identifying dementia among adults with acquired hearing impairment.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".