Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) as a screening tool for cognitive impairment in early stages of psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cognitive alterations have been reported in early stages of psychosis including people with First Episode Psychosis (FEP), Clinical High-Risk Mental State (CHR), and Psychotic-Like Experience (PLE). This study aimed to compare the cognitive function in early stages of psychosis using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a low-cost and brief assessment tool of cognitive functions. A total of 154 individuals, including 35 with FEP, 38 CHR, 44 PLE, and 37 healthy controls (HC), were evaluated with the MoCA in Santiago, Chile. We calculated the mean total score of the MoCA and the standard deviation of the mean. Groups were assessed for a trend to lower scores in a pre-determined sequence (HC > PLE > CHR > FEP) using the Jonckheere-Terpstra test (TJT). The mean total MoCA scores were 24.8 ± 3.3 in FEP, 26.4 ± 2.4 in CHR, 26.4 ± 2.3 in PLE, and 27.2 ± 1.8 in HC. The analyses revealed a significant trend (p < 0.05) toward lower MoCA individual domain scores and MoCA total scores in the following order: HC > PLE > CHR > FEP. The mean total scores of all groups were above the cut-off for cognitive impairment (22 points). The MoCA describes lower scores in cognition across early stages of psychosis and may be a useful low-cost assessment instrument in early intervention centers of poorly resourced settings.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".