MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406201087 · doi:10.1002/alz.092154

Diagnostic performance of online cognitive assessment and plasma biomarkers in Alzheimer’s Disease and Subjective Cognitive Impairment using the Oxford Cognitive Testing Portal

2024· article· en· W4406201087 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sofia Toniolo, Anna Scholcz, Benazir Amein, Akke Ganse‐Dumrath, Sian Thompson, Sanjay Manohar, Henrik Zetterberg, Masud Husain, Sijia Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionCognitive testNeuropsychologyMontreal Cognitive AssessmentAudiologyEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceNeuropsychological assessmentPsychologyMedicineVerbal learningPopulationOncologyCognitive impairmentPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Plasma biomarkers have emerged as a promising tool to detect the presence of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) when cognitive symptoms have not yet emerged. However, there is also a pressing need to detect and track subtle cognitive change at the preclinical stage of AD for population screening purposes and to monitor disease progression at scale. A potential solution is remote cognitive assessment, yet it is still not extensively employed. Method 114 participants (37 AD, 22 subjective cognitive impairment (SCI) patients and 55 age‐matched controls) were recruited from the Oxford Centre for Cognitive Disorders. They were tested on a newly developed, fully remote online cognitive assessment tool, Oxford Cognitive Testing Portal (OCTAL), which hosts a wide range of validated cognitive tasks, such as the Rey‐Osterrieth Complex Figure (ROCF), Trail Making Task (TMT), Digital Symbol Substitution task (DSST)), Corsi Block Task (CORSI), as well as novel visual short‐term memory (Oxford Memory task) and visual long‐term memory (Object‐in‐Scene task) tasks (Figure 1). All participants underwent standard in‐person cognitive testing, i.e. Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination‐III (ACE). Plasma p‐tau181, GFAP, NFL, Aβ42/40 ratio were also measured. Logistic regression was used for group classification. Result Performance on OCTAL was able to discriminate between SCI from healthy controls with an AUC of 0.78 (Figure 2a), statistically outperforming standard neuropsychological testing (ACE), which had an AUC of 0.65. Combining plasma biomarkers to OCTAL further increased diagnostic accuracy, reaching an AUC of 0.82 in group classification. OCTAL also outperformed ACE in distinguishing individuals with AD from SCI (Figure 2b), where adding plasma biomarkers to performance at OCTAL achieved a perfect separation (AUC of 1) between the groups. Conclusion These findings demonstrate the potential of OCTAL for widespread, cost‐effective cognitive testing. They also emphasise the utility of combining plasma biomarkers and digital cognitive tests to improve diagnostic accuracy across different stages of the disease. These accessible tools could pave the way to more scalable protocols for screening, stratification and monitoring of patients with preclinical AD.

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)0.003
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.307 · 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→