MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4400037852 · doi:10.2196/48777

Detection of Mild Cognitive Impairment Through Hand Motor Function Under Digital Cognitive Test: Mixed Methods Study

2024· article· en· W4400037852 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aoyu Li, Jingwen Li, Jiali Chai, Wei Wu, Suamn Chaudhary, Juanjuan Zhao, Yan Qiang

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionDementiaPhysical medicine and rehabilitationTrail Making TestRehabilitationTest (biology)PsychologyPerceptionStroke (engine)MedicineCognitive impairmentPhysical therapyPsychiatryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Early detection of cognitive impairment or dementia is essential to reduce the incidence of severe neurodegenerative diseases. However, currently available diagnostic tools for detecting mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia are time-consuming, expensive, or not widely accessible. Hence, exploring more effective methods to assist clinicians in detecting MCI is necessary. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to explore the feasibility and efficiency of assessing MCI through movement kinetics under tablet-based "drawing and dragging" tasks. METHODS: We iteratively designed "drawing and dragging" tasks by conducting symposiums, programming, and interviews with stakeholders (neurologists, nurses, engineers, patients with MCI, healthy older adults, and caregivers). Subsequently, stroke patterns and movement kinetics were evaluated in healthy control and MCI groups by comparing 5 categories of features related to hand motor function (ie, time, stroke, frequency, score, and sequence). Finally, user experience with the overall cognitive screening system was investigated using structured questionnaires and unstructured interviews, and their suggestions were recorded. RESULTS: The "drawing and dragging" tasks can detect MCI effectively, with an average accuracy of 85% (SD 2%). Using statistical comparison of movement kinetics, we discovered that the time- and score-based features are the most effective among all the features. Specifically, compared with the healthy control group, the MCI group showed a significant increase in the time they took for the hand to switch from one stroke to the next, with longer drawing times, slow dragging, and lower scores. In addition, patients with MCI had poorer decision-making strategies and visual perception of drawing sequence features, as evidenced by adding auxiliary information and losing more local details in the drawing. Feedback from user experience indicates that our system is user-friendly and facilitates screening for deficits in self-perception. CONCLUSIONS: The tablet-based MCI detection system quantitatively assesses hand motor function in older adults and further elucidates the cognitive and behavioral decline phenomenon in patients with MCI. This innovative approach serves to identify and measure digital biomarkers associated with MCI or Alzheimer dementia, enabling the monitoring of changes in patients' executive function and visual perceptual abilities as the disease advances.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.391 · 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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealth→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→