MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406030120 · doi:10.1002/alz.092306

Exploring visual short‐term memory binding tests as early markers of cognitive decline: A comparative study between healthy aging and mild cognitive impairment

2024· article· en· W4406030120 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Monika McAtarsney‐Kovacs, Shahina Pardhan, Raju Sapkota, Ian van der Linde

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionPsychologyDementiaCognitive declineAudiologyGerontologyWorking memoryMedicinePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Elderly people, especially those with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), are at heightened risk of developing dementia. In this study, we examined how well healthy young, normally aging and MCI participants performed in visual short-term memory (VSTM) binding, a cognitive process in which an item's different visual properties (e.g., form, location, colour) are combined and stored momentarily in our mind before being forgotten. Earlier work has identified VSTM binding as a potential cognitive skill that may be disproportionately affected in those with MCI/dementia, meaning that it may serve as an early behavioral marker. METHOD: Three groups of participants were recruited: 34 healthy young adults (mean age 25±3 years), 52 normally aging older adults (mean age 71±6.4 years) and 16 older adults with MCI (mean age 74±6years). All participants completed computer-based VSTM tasks requiring the binding of object-location, object name-location, colour-location, and colour word-location for two or four sequentially presented stimuli (presentation duration <1 sec). Participants also completed standard cognitive tests (Addenbrookes Cognitive Examination, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Trail Making Test, National Adult Reading Test and CANTAB Paired Associates Learning). We compared the performance of healthy young and normally aging older groups to examine the effect of aging; normally aging older and MCI groups were compared to examine the effect of MCI. RESULT: The performance of the normally aging older group was significantly lower than that of the healthy young group for memory tasks requiring object-location (p = .003) and colour-location (p = .014) binding. The performance of the MCI group was significantly lower than that of the normally aging older group for object name-location (p = .014), colour-location (p = .036) and colour word-location (p<.001) VSTM tasks. VSTM binding performance correlated well with standard cognitive tests (ps ≤ .05). CONCLUSION: The performance of the young healthy group exceeded that of both older groups. Not surprisingly the MCI group performed least well, particularly in tasks assessing object name-location, colour-location and colour word-location binding. The disproportionate deterioration of these abilities implies that they may serve as early markers of the cognitive decline associated with MCI/dementia, and may form the basis of straightforward cognitive tests that may complement standard cognitive tests.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→