Behavioral Tests for Central Auditory Processing Evaluation in the Investigation of Early Manifestations of Cognitive Decline and Dementias: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This scoping review aimed to identify behavioral tests for central auditory processing (CAP) assessment that can be used to investigate early manifestations of pathological cognitive decline in adults and the older adults. Early detection of cognitive decline and dementias is a strategy for delaying the progression of these clinical conditions. METHOD: This scoping review was conducted using various online databases and gray literature sources, including the Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences, PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. Studies were included if they assessed individuals who underwent behavioral tests for CAP evaluation and had completed at least one cognitive test. RESULTS: A total of 1,190 references were retrieved from the databases, with 151 identified as duplicates. After screening 1,039 articles by title and abstract, eight studies were selected for full-text review, and five were included in the final synthesis. The behavioral tests for CAP evaluation used to investigate preclinical manifestations of cognitive decline and dementia were: Synthetic Sentence Identification With Ipsilateral Competing Message, Staggered Spondaic Word test, Dichotic Sentence Identification, and Dichotic Digits Test. Among these, dichotic tests were identified as having the strongest association with cognitive decline, probable Alzheimer's disease, or dementia. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that dichotic tests are the most frequently utilized behavioral tests for CAP evaluation and serve as valuable tools for detecting early manifestations of cognitive decline and dementias. These tests could play a significant role in the early diagnosis and management of cognitive impairments.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".