Shanghai Cognitive Screening: A Mobile Cognitive Assessment Tool Using Voice Recognition to Detect Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia in the Community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A rapid digital instrument is needed to facilitate community-based screening of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) in China. OBJECTIVE: We developed a voice recognition-based cognitive assessment (Shanghai Cognitive Screening, SCS) on mobile devices and evaluated its diagnostic performance. METHODS: Participants (N = 251) including healthy controls (N = 98), subjective cognitive decline (SCD, N = 42), MCI (N = 80), and mild AD (N = 31) were recruited from the memory clinic at Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital. The SCS is fully self-administered, takes about six minutes and measures the function of visual memory, language, and executive function. Participants were instructed to complete SCS tests, gold-standard neuropsychological tests and standardized structural 3T brain MRI. RESULTS: The Cronbach's alpha was 0.910 of the overall scale, indicating high internal consistency. The SCS total score had an AUC of 0.921 to detect AD (sensitivity = 0.903, specificity = 0.945, positive predictive value = 0.700, negative predictive value = 0.986, likelihood ratio = 16.42, number needed for screening utility = 0.639), and an AUC of 0.838 to detect MCI (sensitivity = 0.793, specificity = 0.671, positive predictive value = 0.657, negative predictive value = 0.803, likelihood ratio = 2.41, number needed for screening utility = 0.944). The subtests demonstrated moderate to high correlations with the gold-standard tests from their respective cognitive domains. The SCS total score and its memory scores all correlated positively with relative volumes of the whole hippocampus and almost all subregions, after controlling for age, sex, and education. CONCLUSION: The SCS has good diagnostic accuracy for detecting MCI and AD dementia and has the potential to facilitate large-scale screening in the general community.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".