Validity, feasibility, and effectiveness of a voice‐recognition based digital cognitive screener for dementia and mild cognitive impairment in community‐dwelling older Chinese adults: A large‐scale implementation study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We investigated the validity, feasibility, and effectiveness of a voice recognition-based digital cognitive screener (DCS), for detecting dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in a large-scale community of elderly participants. METHODS: Eligible participants completed demographic, cognitive, functional assessments and the DCS. Neuropsychological tests were used to assess domain-specific and global cognition, while the diagnosis of MCI and dementia relied on the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale. RESULTS: Among the 11,186 participants, the DCS showed high completion rates (97.5%) and a short administration time (5.9 min) across gender, age, and education groups. The DCS demonstrated areas under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUCs) of 0.95 and 0.83 for dementia and MCI detection, respectively, among 328 participants in the validation phase. Furthermore, the DCS resulted in time savings of 16.2% to 36.0% compared to the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Montral Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). DISCUSSION: This study suggests that the DCS is an effective and efficient tool for dementia and MCI case-finding in large-scale cognitive screening. HIGHLIGHTS: To our best knowledge, this is the first cognitive screening tool based on voice recognition and utilizing conversational AI that has been assessed in a large population of Chinese community-dwelling elderly. With the upgrading of a new multimodal understanding model, the DCS can accurately assess participants' responses, including different Chinese dialects, and provide automatic scores. The DCS not only exhibited good discriminant ability in detecting dementia and MCI cases, it also demonstrated a high completion rate and efficient administration regardless of gender, age, and education differences. The DCS is economically efficient, scalable, and had a better screening efficacy compared to the MMSE or MoCA, for wider implementation.
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 | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".