MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411600831 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0322351

The Healthy Brain 9 (HB9): A new instrument to characterize subjective cognitive decline, and detect anosognosia in mild cognitive impairment

2025· article· en· W4411600831 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSpatial Neglect and Hemispheric Dysfunction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsAnosognosiaCognitionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentDementiaEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceClinical psychologyPsychologyGerontologyMedicinePsychiatryDiseaseCognitive impairmentPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Subjective cognitive decline (SCD) affects 10% of older adults and may be a risk factor for future mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. Some individuals with MCI have anosognosia, the denial or lack of awareness of their cognitive deficits. We developed and tested the Healthy Brain 9 (HB9), a self-reported assessment of cognitive performance and everyday functioning, in a diverse community-based cohort of older adults in South Florida. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Community-based longitudinal study of brain health. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 344 participants (mean age of 68.5±9.3y, 70% were female, 62% with 16 or less years of education, 39% ethnoracial minorities) completed the study. The sample included 42% normal cognition, 27% SCD and 30% MCI. Within the MCI group, 62% demonstrated awareness of cognitive deficits and 38% had MCI with anosognosia. MEASUREMENTS: The psychometric properties of the HB9 were examined and the performance of the HB9 was compared to Gold Standard comprehensive clinical-cognitive-functional-behavioral evaluations and biomarkers evaluations from the Healthy Brain Initiative at the University of Miami. RESULTS: The HB9 had strong psychometric properties with a Cronbach α of 0.898 (95%CI: 0.882-0.913) and low floor and ceiling effects. The HB9 performed well across different sociodemographic groups. Lower HB9 scores were associated with greater resilience, better physical performance, and less physical frailty. Higher HB9 scores were associated with more comorbid medical conditions, more mood symptoms, lower resilience, and more functional impairment. A cut-off score of 4 on the HB9 provided a 15-fold ability to detect SCD in cognitively normal individuals, and a 14-fold ability to detect anosognosia in MCI. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the HB9 as an assessment of subjective cognitive complaints may help identify SCD for potential interventions and enrollment into clinical trials. The HB9 may also identify anosognosia which could lead to worse outcomes in MCI.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.230 · 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