MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7024829187

Teste do Tempo & Troco: Estudo de validação

2011· other· pt· W7024829187 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePortuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) · 2011
Typeother
Languagept
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Processing and 3D Reconstruction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepression (economics)AnxietyDepressive symptomsMini–Mental State ExaminationTest (biology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectivo: O nosso estudo teve como objectivo validar o Teste Time and Change (T&C) na população portuguesa. O T&C é um instrumento útil e eficaz para detectar demência na população idosa, avaliando duas actividades básicas do quotidiano. Método: A amostra geral do nosso estudo é constituída por 401 idosos, dos quais 96 (23,9%) são do sexo masculino e 305 (76,1%) do sexo feminino, com idades que variam entre 65 e 100 anos, e que se encontram sob resposta social (lares ou centros de dia) no Concelho de Coimbra. Para além do T&C, estes idosos foram avaliados com o Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), para avaliar o defeito cognitivo; Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), para avaliar o declínio cognitivo, com o Geriatric Anxiety Inventory (GAI), para os sintomas ansiosos e com o Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) para os sintomas depressivos. Resultados: O T&C com o MoCA apresenta uma sensibilidade de 82,7%, uma especificidade de 65,7%, um PPP de 71,1% e um PPN de 78,7%. Na validade de critério concorrente com o MMSE, o T&C exibe uma sensibilidade de 79,6%, uma especificidade de 60,1%, um PPP de 65,0% e um PPN igual a 76,0%. Utilizando como padrão de referência o MoCA, o T&C é mais sensível a diagnosticar demência em indivíduos com escolaridade. Por outro lado, usando como padrão de referência o MMSE, o T&C é mais sensível em idosos sem escolaridade. Quanto mais velhos são os indivíduos, maior é a capacidade do T&C de diagnosticar demência, independente do padrão de referência usado. Na estabilidade temporal teste-reteste de duas horas e de seis meses o T&C apresentou concordâncias moderadas. Quanto à validade convergente, o T&C exibe uma correlação moderada com o MoCA e baixa com o MMSE. Cinquenta virgula seis por cento dos idosos pontuou positivamente no teste; este valor indica que a maioria dos idosos possui demência. Não houve associações estatisticamente significativas entre o resultado global do T&C e as variáveis sociodemográficas, onde os idosos mais velhos têm desempenhos inferiores (36,3%). Por fim, verificámos que não existem associações estatisticamente significativas entre a sintomatologia depressiva e a sintomatologia ansiosa e o declínio cognitivo. Conclusão: Este estudo mostra que a versão portuguesa do teste T&C é fidedigno e válido para a população idosa portuguesa, sob resposta social e baixa escolaridade. Os elevados valores no T&C apontam para a urgência de estratégias de intervenção. / Purpose: Our study aimed to validate the Time and Change Test (T&C) in the Portuguese population. The T&C is an useful and effective instrument for detecting dementia in the elderly population, assessing two basic activities of daily life. Method: The overall sample of our study consists of 401 seniors, of whom 96 (23.9%) were male and 305 (76.1%) female, with ages ranging between 65 and 100 years, and who are in social response (nursing homes or day centers) in the Municipality of Coimbra. In addition to the T&C, these elderly were assessed with the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) to detect the cognitive defect; the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) to assess cognitive decline; the Geriatric Anxiety Inventory (GAI) for anxiety symptoms, and the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) for depressive symptoms. Results: The T&C with the MoCA has a sensitivity of 82.7%, a specificity of 65.7%, a PPP of 71.1% and 78.7% of a NPP. In the concurrent criterion validity with the MMSE, the T&C exhibits a sensitivity of 79.6%, a specificity of 60.1%, a PPP of 65.0% and a NPP equal to 76.0%. Using as benchmark the MoCA, the T&C is more sensitive to diagnose dementia in individuals with some type of schooling. On the other hand, using as a reference standard the MMSE, the T&C is more sensitive in the elderly with no schooling. The older individuals, the higher the T&C's ability to diagnose dementia, independent of the reference standard used. In T&C test-retest stability over time of two hours and of six months showed moderate agreement. As to convergent validity, the T&C exhibits a moderate correlation with the MoCA and low with the MMSE. Fifty point six percent of seniors scored positively in the test, this value indicates that most older people have dementia. There were no statistically significant associations between the overall result of the T&C and the sociodemographic variables, where the oldest old have lower performance (36.3%). Finally, we found that there are no statistically significant associations between depressive symptoms and anxiety symptoms and cognitive decline. Conclusion: This study shows that the Portuguese version of the T&C test is reliable and valid for elderly Portuguese, under low education and social response. The high values in the T&C points to the urgency of intervention strategies.

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 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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0100.010
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.298 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePortuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT)Same topicImage Processing and 3D ReconstructionFrench-language works237,207