MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395080473 · doi:10.1155/2024/5527225

Comparing the Efficacy of Two Cognitive Screening Tools in Identifying Gray and White Matter Brain Damage among Older Adults

2024· article· en· W4395080473 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paula Andreatta Maduro, Manoel Pereira Guimarães, Mateus de Sousa Rodrigues, Ana Paula Pereira Rolim Coimbra Pinto, Américo Mota, Alaine Souza Lima Rocha, Juliana Magalhães Duarte Matoso, Bruno Bavaresco Gambassi, Paulo Adriano Schwingel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aging Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Ciência e Tecnologia do Estado de PernambucoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsGray (unit)MedicineWhite matterCognitionWhite (mutation)GerontologyCognitive impairmentData sciencePsychiatryMagnetic resonance imagingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. Ageing is associated with structural changes in brain regions and functional decline in cognitive domains. Noninvasive tools for identifying structural damage in the brains of older adults are relevant for early treatment. Aims. This study aims to evaluate and compare the accuracy of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA©) in identifying gray and white matter brain damage in older individuals with varying degrees of cognitive impairment. Methods. Ninety older adults (62 women) with an average age of 69 ± 7 years were enrolled and categorized as having no cognitive impairment (NCI), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), or moderate cognitive impairment (MoCI). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was utilized to assess the number, volume, and distribution of brain damage. The Fazekas and Scheltens scales were applied to the brain MRIs, and inferential statistics were employed to compare variables among the groups. Results. Cognitive impairment was observed in 56.7% of the participants (95% confidence interval (CI): 46.4–66.4%), with thirty-six older adults (40%) classified as MCI and 15 (17%) as MoCI. Cognitive impairment and medial temporal lobe (MTL) atrophy were found to be associated ( p=0.001 ), exhibiting higher mean volume scales of the MTL atrophied area in the MoCI group ( p<0.001 ). The MMSE accurately revealed MTL atrophy based on the Scheltens ( p<0.05 ) and Fazekas ( p<0.05 ) scales. At the same time, the MoCA accurately identified periventricular white matter (PWM) abnormalities according to the Fazekas scale ( p<0.05 ). Conclusions. The MMSE and MoCA screening tools effectively identified gray and white matter brain damage in older adults with varying degrees of cognitive impairment. Lower MMSE scores are associated with MTL atrophy and lesions, and lower MoCA scores are related to PWM lesions. The concurrent use of MMSE and MoCA is recommended for assessing structural changes in distinct brain regions.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.352 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aging ResearchSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207