MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387002251 · doi:10.1007/s40120-023-00540-2

Rule-Based Identification of Individuals with Mild Cognitive Impairment or Alzheimer’s Disease Using Clinical Notes from the United States Veterans Affairs Healthcare System

2023· article· en· W4387002251 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology and Therapy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Coding and Health Information
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersEisai IncorporatedNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthEisai
KeywordsVeterans AffairsDiagnosis codeMedicineCognitive impairmentDiseaseGerontologyCohortPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Early identification of individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a clinical and research imperative. Use of diagnostic codes for MCI and AD identification has limitations. We used clinical notes to supplement diagnostic codes in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System (VAHS) electronic health records (EHR) to identify and establish cohorts of Veterans recorded with MCI or AD. METHODS: Targeted keyword searches for MCI ("Mild cognitive impairment;" "MCI") and AD ("Alz*") were used to extract clinical notes from the VAHS EHR from fiscal year (FY) 2010 through FY 2019. Iterative steps of inclusion and exclusion were applied until searches achieved a positive predictive value ≥ 80%. MCI and AD cohorts were identified via clinical notes and/or diagnostic codes (i.e., including Veterans recorded by "Notes Only," "Notes + Code," or "Codes Only"). RESULTS: A total of 2,134,661 clinical notes from 339,007 Veterans met the iterative search criteria for MCI due to any cause and 4,231,933 notes from 572,063 Veterans met the iterative search criteria for AD. Over the 10-year study period, the number of clinical notes recording AD was generally stable, whereas the number for MCI more than doubled. More Veterans were identified for the MCI or AD cohorts via clinical notes than by diagnostic codes, particularly in the AD cohort. Among Veterans identified by having "Notes + Code" for MCI, the number first recorded by a code was lower than the number first recorded by a note until FY 2015 and then gradually became comparable after FY 2015. Among Veterans identified by having "Notes + Code" for AD, the number first recorded by a note was more than double the number first recorded by a code AD in each of the FYs. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical note-based identification captured more Veterans recorded with MCI and AD than diagnostic code-based identification.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.537

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.372
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.117 · 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