Remote clinical cognitive assessment: Validation of mobile interactive cognitive self‐assessment scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease relies on trained clinicians and specialized diagnostic tests. Under the circumstances of COVID‐19, the clinical interview is restricted, which caused an additional delay in diagnosis. Emerging demand for remote interactive cognitive assessment aroused for diagnosis and mass screening. We aimed to develop a mobile interactive cognitive self‐ assessment scale (ICSAS) Method The ICSAS was created by an expert group applying nominal group techniques and focus groups. Initial examination and iterative rounds were conducted in participants from the community and hospital to optimize the scale. The final version of ICSAS included 4 tasks, covering executive function, logic memory, visual memory, and logic memory recall. Validation was conducted in 387 cognitively impaired participants and 297 participants with normal cognition from the institution. 2034 participants were enrolled from the community. Result No significant difference was found in age and sex between cognitively impaired participants and normal controls. Years of education, the score of MMSE and MoCA were higher in normal controls. The Cronbach’s alpha was 0.79 which indicated relative good reliability. The KMO value was 0.76, and the optimal cutoff point was 228.90, leading to the sensitivity of 0.90 and specificity of 0.71. The positive likelihood ratio was 3.10, and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.14, which suggested ICSAS as an ideal scale. 284 participants from the community were predicted to be cognitively impaired, accounting for approximately 15% of participants from the community, which corresponds to the prevalence research. Conclusion Our research developed a remote interactive cognitive self‐assessment scale (ICSAS) which has relatively good reliability and sensitivity. The ICSAS may ease the struggle of remote clinical cognitive assessment brought by the COVID‐19 pandemic. Also, from the long‐term perspective, the application of ICSAS may enhance the feasibility of cognitive assessment, and it may be ideal for mass screening and cognitively impaired patients’ monitoring.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".