MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6991996734

Investigating the feasibility of neuro-cognitive games for detecting the onset of dementia using a phantom arm compared to touchscreen version

2018· dissertation· en· W6991996734 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTouchscreenRecallImaging phantomDementiaCognitionCognitive impairmentObject (grammar)Session (web analytics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this preliminary study, a virtual reality game was developed to detect the onset of dementia. The game takes place in a 3D virtual kitchen, and the player is tasked to identify displaced objects from memory and to recall the order of displacement. Two different hardware platforms were used to play the game; a touchscreen tablet and a phantom robotic arm. Cognitive abilities such as object recognition, spatial memory and memory retention were assessed. Study participants were 45 seniors, out of which four were diagnosed with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and 3 with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Their performances were evaluated against the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test. They performed the experiments both with a phantom arm mimicking humans’ arm and with a touchscreen version. Healthy older adults performed significantly better than MCI participants, who in turn performed better than AD participants. MoCA significantly correlated with the game score on both hardware interfaces. There was also a significant difference between the performance score while using phantom robotic arm compared to that when using the touchscreen, pointing towards a deficit of visuomotor ability in ageing. The scores of performances using touchscreen version of the games was a significant predictor of MoCA, while the scores of using phantom arm was a significant predictor of age. MCI participants performed much worse on order recall tasks compared to object identification tasks, suggesting a more pronounced deficit in memory retention. More MCI and AD participants should be investigated to determine the designed experiments’ sensitivity and specificity in detecting dementia.

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)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→