MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384524181 · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2023.1195220

Using MemTrax memory test to screen for post-stroke cognitive impairment after ischemic stroke: a cross-sectional study

2023· article· en· W4384524181 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiaoxiao Zhao, Shujuan Dai, Rong Zhang, Xinjie Chen, Mingjie Zhao, Michael F. Bergeron, Xianbo Zhou, Junyan Zhang, Lianmei Zhong, J. Wesson Ashford, Xiaolei Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Human Neuroscience · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsStroke (engine)Ischemic strokeMedicineTest (biology)Cognitive impairmentCognitionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyCardiologyPsychiatryIschemiaEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Whereas the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Addenbrooke’s cognitive examination-revised (ACE-R) are commonly used tests for the detection of post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI), these instruments take 10–30 min to administer and do not assess processing speed, which is a critical impairment in PSCI. MemTrax (MTx) is a continuous recognition test, which evaluates complex information processing, accuracy, speed, and attention, in 2 min. Aim To evaluate whether MTx is an effective and practical tool for PSCI assessment. Methods This study enrolled acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients who have assessed the cognitive status including MTx, clinical dementia rating (CDR), MoCA, Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), Hamilton depression scale (HAMD), Hamilton anxiety scale (HAMA), the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), modified Rankin scale (mRS), and Barthel Index of activity of daily living (BI) combined with the physical examinations of the neurologic system at the 90-day (D90) after the AIS. The primary endpoint of this study was establishing MTx cut-offs for distinguishing PSCI from AIS. Results Of the 104 participants, 60 were classified to the PSCI group. The optimized cut-off value of MTx-%C (percent correct) was 78%, with a sensitivity and specificity for detecting PSCI from Non-PSCI of 90.0 and 84.1%, respectively, and an AUC of 0.919. Regarding the MTx-Cp (Composite score = MTx-%C/MTx-RT), using 46.3 as a cut-off value, the sensitivity and specificity for detecting PSCI from Non-PSCI were 80.0 and 93.2%, with an AUC of 0.925. Multivariate linear regression showed that PSCI reduced the MTx-%C (Coef. −14.18, 95% CI −18.41∼−9.95, p < 0.001) and prolonged the MTx-RT (response time) (Coef. 0.29, 95% CI 0.16∼0.43, p < 0.001) and reduced the MTx-CP (Coef. −19.11, 95% CI −24.29∼−13.93, p < 0.001). Conclusion MemTrax (MTx) is valid and effective for screening for PSCI among target patients and is a potentially valuable and practical tool in the clinical follow-up, monitoring, and case management of PSCI.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Human NeuroscienceSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207