MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323645548 · doi:10.1002/dad2.12406

Reliability of the NACC Telephone‐administered Neuropsychological Battery (T‐cog) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment for participants in the USC ADRC

2023· article· en· W4323645548 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rebecca Sitra Howard, Terry E. Goldberg, James Luo, Cynthia Muñoz, Lon S. Schneider

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia Diagnosis Assessment & Disease Monitoring · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on AgingDella Martin Foundation
KeywordsIntraclass correlationMontreal Cognitive AssessmentNeuropsychologyNeuropsychological testReliability (semiconductor)PsychologyMedicineNeuropsychological assessmentCognitionAudiologyPsychiatryPsychometricsClinical psychologyCognitive impairment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Restrictions during the COVID‐19 pandemic necessitated remote administration of neuropsychological testing. We assessed the test–retest reliability for a telephone‐administered cognitive battery, recommended for use in the National Institute on Aging Alzheimer's Disease Research Center (ADRC). Methods 64 participants in the University of Southern California ADRC clinical core underwent repeat telephone evaluation using the T‐cog Neuropsychological Battery. Reliability was measured by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for continuous variables and weighted Kappa coefficient for categorical variables. Mean scores for Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) total and Craft Story 21 Immediate and Delayed Recall were compared using paired t tests. Results Mean age was 74.8 (8.3 standard deviation); 73.4% were female. ICCs ranged from 0.52 to 0.84, indicating moderate test–retest reliability except for number span backward, which showed poor reliability. Weighted Kappa for MoCA items ranged from −0.016 to 0.734; however, relatively good observed agreement was seen across all items (70.3% to 98.4%). Although MoCA total scores did not significantly change, Craft Story 21 Immediate and Delayed Recall mean scores increased between first and second administrations (P < 0.0001). Discussion Test–retest reliability for the T‐cog Neuropsychological Battery is adequate. The variation seen in testing is similar to results seen from face‐to‐face testing, with Craft Story 21 recall showing modest and expected practice effects. Highlights Moderate test–retest reliability is seen in most measures of the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center Neuropsychological Test Battery and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.52 to 0.84, except for number Span backward. Weighted Kappa for MoCA items varied, but good observed agreement was seen. MoCA total mean score did not change significantly between administrations. Craft Story 21 Immediate and Delayed Recall means increased on repeat testing (P < 0.0001).

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations22
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia Diagnosis Assessment & Disease MonitoringSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207