MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390200575 · doi:10.1002/alz.079255

LAS‐Face‐ Name Associative Memory Exam: Discriminant validity for the detection of associative memory disorders in people with mild cognitive impairment in Argentina

2023· article· en· W4390200575 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Greta Keller, Agostina Carello, Micaela Arruabarrena, Cecilia Palermo, Nicolas Corvalán, Ismael Luis Calandri, Clara Vila‐Castelar, Ricardo Allegri, Yakeel T. Quiroz, Lucía Crivelli

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCognitionRecallNeuropsychologyPopulationMontreal Cognitive AssessmentFace validityEpisodic memoryNeuropsychological assessmentCognitive impairmentAudiologyClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicinePsychiatryPsychometricsCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The Latin American Spanish version of the Face‐Name Associative Memory Exam (LAS‐FNAME) is a validated version of the test that has been used to detect subtle cognitive changes in cognitively unimpaired adults at increased risk for Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Performance in this test has also been associated with markers of brain pathology in cognitively unimpaired older adults at increased risk for AD due to genetic factors or subjective cognitive decline (Papp et al., 2014;Vila‐Castelar et al., 2020). However, this test has not yet been used for the detection of Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) in the Latin American population. This study aims to analyze the discriminative validity and diagnostic performance of the LAS FNAME for the detection of verbal associative memory disorders in patients with MCI. Method We recruited 30 patients with MCI according to Petersen’s criteria (2010) and 20 healthy controls matched by age, sex and educational level. All participants completed the LAS‐FNAME, which consists of 12 learning trials of novel pairs of face‐names (immediate learning), followed by a delayed recall condition, and a neuropsychological assessment that included: Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Craft Story 21, Multifactorial Memory Questionnaire (MMQ‐S) and a Functional Activity Questionnaire (FAQ). Result The groups did not differ in age, sex or education (p = 0.25, p = 0.54, p = 0.54). The age range was 61 to 86 years (M = 74.66; SD = 6.65) and the education range was 7 to 18 years (M = 14.63; SD = 3.41). The LAS‐FNAME showed an ability to discriminate against healthy controls from patients with MCI, both in its immediate (AUC = 0.81) and delayed (AUC = 0.79) conditions. The predictive ability was superior than a screening measure (MoCA, AUC = 0.74). The sensitivity and specificity was 68.4% and 89.3%, respectively. The LAS‐FNAME also showed evidence of concurrent validity with a standard memory test (Craft Story 21) in both immediate (r = 0.52, p<0.01) and delayed (r = 0.63, p<0.01) conditions, and reliability was excellent (α = 0.91). Conclusion Performance on the LAS‐FNAME was able to distinguish MCI patients from healthy controls, suggesting that the LAS‐FNAME can detect early cognitive changes in prodromal stages of Alzheimer’s disease in Spanish‐speaking individuals.

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)0.001
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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