MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380422723 · doi:10.2340/jrm.v55.4442

Development of a Swedish short version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment for cognitive screening in patients with stroke

2023· article· en· W4380422723 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tamar Abzhandadze, Erik Lundström, Dongni Buvarp, Marie Eriksson, Terence J. Quinn, Katharina S. Sunnerhagen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Rehabilitation Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSahlgrenska UniversitetssjukhusetVetenskapsrådet
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentConfidence intervalCognitionStroke (engine)MedicineRehabilitationVerbal fluency testAudiologyPhysical therapyCognitive impairmentPhysical medicine and rehabilitationNeuropsychologyGerontologyPsychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: The primary objective was to develop a Swedish short version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (s-MoCA-SWE) for use with patients with stroke. Secondary objectives were to identify an optimal cut-off value for the s-MoCA-SWE to screen for cognitive impairment and to compare its sensitivity with that of previously developed short forms of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment.Design: Cross-sectional study.Subjects/patients: Patients admitted to stroke and rehabilitation units in hospitals across Sweden.Methods: Cognition was screened using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Working versions of the s-MoCA-SWE were developed using supervised and unsupervised algorithms.Results: Data from 3,276 patients were analysed (40% female, mean age 71.5 years, 56% minor stroke at admission). The suggested s-MoCA-SWE comprised delayed recall, visuospatial/executive function, serial 7, fluency, and abstraction. The aggregated scores ranged from 0 to 16. A threshold for impaired cognition ≤ 12 had a sensitivity of 97.41 (95% confidence interval, 96.64–98.03) and positive predictive value of 90.30 (95% confidence interval 89.23–91.27). The s-MoCA-SWE had a higher absolute sensitivity than that of other short forms.Conclusion: The s-MoCA-SWE (threshold ≤ 12) can detect post-stroke cognitive issues. The high sensitivity makes it a potentially useful “rule-out” tool that may eliminate severe cognitive impairment in people with stoke. LAY ABSTRACTStroke survivors have an increased risk of developing cognitive impairment, a common consequence of stroke. Therefore, many international guidelines recommend cognitive screening for all patients admitted to hospital with stroke. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) has been recommended as an appropriate cognitive test to be applied in stroke units. Although the administration of MoCA takes approximately 15 min, the screening can take longer in patients with acute stroke. Therefore, this study aimed to develop a Swedish short version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (s-MoCA-SWE) based on data from a large Swedish sample of acute and early subacute stroke survivors. The current study analysed data from 3,276 patients and suggest an s-MoCA-SWE that comprised the following tasks: delayed recall, visuospatial/executive function, serial 7, fluency, and abstraction. The s-MoCA-SWE could identify cognitive impairment in 97% of patients. In conclusion, s-MoCA-SWE has the potential to rule out severe cognitive 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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Rehabilitation MedicineSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207