MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412354178 · doi:10.1101/2025.07.10.25331273

Early screening for mild cognitive impairment among adults aged 60 and above: A pilot study at a secondary hospital in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

2025· preprint· en· W4412354178 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
The Ha Ngoc Than

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHo chi minhCognitive impairmentGerontologyMedicineDemographyPsychologyCognitionGeographyPsychiatrySociologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background This pilot study explored the feasibility of early screening for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) among adults aged 60 and above at a secondary-level public hospital in Vietnam, with the goal of assessing tool acceptability and implementation potential in routine care. Methods Among 113 individuals approached, 101 provided consent and 99 completed the screening. Thirty participants met the eligibility criteria and were assessed using six validated tools: the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Geriatric Depression Scale-15 (GDS-15), Katz Index of Independence in Activities of Daily Living (Katz Index), Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale (Lawton Scale), and Senior Fitness Test. Results The enrollment rate was 89.4%, with a screening completion rate of 98%. The MMSE and MoCA demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach’s α=0.72 and 0.68, respectively). The GDS-15 (α=0.71) was reliable for depression screening, while the Lawton Scale (α=0.73) effectively assessed functional independence in instrumental activities. However, the Katz ADL showed a ceiling effect, limiting its sensitivity to early impairments. Conclusions The study confirmed the acceptability of cognitive screening procedures and their practical application in a secondary hospital setting. These preliminary findings provide a foundation for future studies on scalability and integration into routine health services.

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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicFrailty in Older Adults→French-language works237,207→