Assessment of prevalence, risk factors, and neuropsychiatric symptoms of mild neurocognitive disorder among elderly in Suez Canal Area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Mild neurocognitive disorder is mild reduction in cognitive abilities than a previous level, requiring compensatory strategies that help maintain independence, and is associated with behavioral and psychiatric symptoms. This cross-sectional comparative study aimed to evaluate prevalence of mild neurocognitive disorder, its risk factors, and associated neuropsychiatric symptoms. It included a sample of 156 elderly people ≥ 60 years old in Suez Canal Area from geriatric homes and primary health care centers. Study tools included a semi-structured clinical interview to assess sociodemographic, clinical, and lifestyle risk factors, DSM-5 criteria for diagnosis of neurocognitive disorders, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale, and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire. Results Prevalence of mild neurocognitive disorder was 37.2% in total sample with mean total score of 22.7 ± 6.1 by Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale. The most common subtype was amnestic multiple domain subtype (72.4%). Its predicting factors included advanced age, lower education, physical work, non-adherence to treatment, less physical activity, bone and joint disorders, and family history of cognitive impairment. The neuropsychiatric symptoms with highest scores were sleep/nighttime behavior, depression, irritability, and eating/appetite, respectively. Among the two study groups, geriatric home residents had highly significant lower cognitive scores ( p < 0.001) and higher Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire scores. Conclusion Mild neurocognitive disorder is common among elderly people and is associated with neuropsychiatric symptoms that need screening and management. Modifiable risk factors should be identified to provide interventions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".