MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390196553 · doi:10.1002/alz.082146

Design and development of the intelligent voice recognition‐based cognitive assessment WeChat mini‐program

2023· article· en· W4390196553 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jingnan Wu, Nan Chen, Huanhuan Xia, Ziming Wang, Yatian Li

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionRecallComputer scienceNeuropsychologyMontreal Cognitive AssessmentPsychologyCognitive psychologyCognitive impairment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Early screening of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is crucial for the elderly to access formal diagnosis and intervention of Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) and related dementias (ADRD) at early stages. Owing to the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) and voice recognition technology, the detection method using speech patterns as digital biomarkers collected by digital consumer devices can accommodate a huge demand for early and large‐scale detection. We here reported the design and development of the Shanghai Cognitive Screening (SCS) mini‐program, the first intelligent voice recognition‐based cognitive assessment WeChat mini‐program in China. Method The SCS mini‐program was developed based on the cognitive paradigm and classic pencil‐and‐paper neuropsychological assessments (e.g. Montreal cognitive assessment basic [MoCA‐B]). Through Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR), users speak to complete tasks including Naming, Immediate Recall, Delayed Recall, Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT), Delayed RecallII, and Recognition (Figure 1). The acoustic, phonetics, and linguistic speech pattern variables would also be extracted and processed as digital biomarkers. The SCS intelligent prediction model enrolls speech pattern digital biomarkers, individual task scores, and time use variables with age, gender, and education level as linking variables, which enables to grade the user’s global cognitive function and individual cognitive domains (Figure 2). Result After completing all tasks in the SCS, users can immediately read the comprehensive results which are divided into 4 categories corresponding to 4 grading intervals: “healthy” (cognitively normal), “low risk” (suspected SCD), “medium‐high risk” (suspected MCI), and “high risk” (suspected AD). We also use a radar chart with scores of cognitive domains (i.e., memory, attention, visual perception, language, and executive functions), a memory trend graph (i.e., immediate and delayed recalls), an attention persistence graph, and related advice in the automatically generated report (Figure 3). Conclusion The SCS mini‐program is more efficient and economical compared to traditional paper‐based cognitive assessments. It is suitable for clinical cognitive assessment, remote self‐rating, and community screening for MCI and dementias among Chinese older adults and other ADRD high‐risk groups. Clinical trials are yet to be conducted to validate the accuracy and diagnostic value of the SCS WeChat mini‐program.

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)0.006
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→