Diagnostic validity of the Persian version of Montreal Cognitive Assessment – basic for cognitive screening
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The growing number of older people with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) highlights the need for suitable and effective neuropsychological assessments. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment Basic (MoCA-B) is designed to identify MCI in individuals with lower literacy and education levels. This study seeks to validate the use of MoCA-B in the Persian-speaking population. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, the original English version of the MoCA-B test was translated into Persian using the forward-backward method. The study involved 60 cognitively healthy aging individuals, 30 with Alzheimer's disease, and 30 MCI patients. All participants met the MMSE, MoCA-B, DSM-5, and Albert's criteria. RESULTS: MoCA-B scores in patients with AD were significantly lower than in the patients with MCI and healthy individuals (P < 0.001). They were significantly lower in MCI than individuals without cognitive impairment (P < 0.001). The cutoff score for discriminating between patients with AD/MCI and individuals without cognitive impairment was 20.5 (sensitivity = 95.0%, specificity = 88.3%, AUC = 0.972). CONCLUSION: This study shows that the MoCA-B is a suitable screening tool for distinguishing persons with cognitive impairment (MCI and AD) in the Persian-speaking population.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".