MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7066947307

MCI认知损伤的特征及其早期识别体系的探索

2012· other· zh· W7066947307 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

VenueInstitutional Repository of Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences (Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences) · 2012
Typeother
Languagezh
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle Detector Development and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionSample (material)Context (archaeology)Set (abstract data type)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

在过去的十年里,关于认知障碍研究的核心发生了重大转移。从对痴呆的病理和生化机制的研究逐渐转向了对其前临床期——轻度认知障碍(Mild Cognitive Impairment, MCI)的识别及干预。老年认知功能障碍的发展是个长期的过程,可能在临床前数年或数十年即已开始。在疾病进展的后期,特别是发生痴呆后再开始治疗,虽仍可能延缓认知功能衰退的进程,但已有的损害不能再逆转。如果能在临床诊断之前尽早发现潜在患者,延缓其转化为痴呆的速度甚至维持其认知稳定将极大地提高患者的精神健康和生活质量,减少家庭和政府的开支。 从多维度研究识别轻度认知障碍患者以及对痴呆病程敏感的指标已经成为国际该领域的一大热点。现有的MCI和轻度痴呆的识别和诊断方法主要有临床问诊、神经心理学筛查、功能影像学分析、以及生化学标记四类方法。每种技术和方法在区分认知正常、轻度认知障碍和痴呆人群上都有各自的优势和劣势。现在还没有一种方法可以独立地作为整个病程的单一指标而存在。 本研究依托课题组与上海交通大学附属精神卫生中心联合主持的国家科技支撑计划项目——中国老年心理问题的评估、预警与干预示范研究,获得了一批基于社区老人大样本取样的数据(n=1056, 其中临床诊断为认知正常老人865人,MCI老人115人,痴呆21人,其他45人),包含神经心理学筛查、医师评定、血常规、尿检以及部分被试的影像学数据,这为我们研究识别MCI的指标体系提供了可能。本文通过三个研究分别探讨生化学标记(内源性甲醛)、简易认知筛查量表(蒙特利尔认知量表)以及功能影像学指标(延迟匹配任务)在识别轻度认知障碍中的作用。我们假设:在基于社区的大样本MCI筛查过程中,首先使用方便快捷的外周生化学标记进行初步筛查,再在检出的可疑人群中进行一对一的神经心理学细筛,最后对细筛检出的个体进行功能影像学确诊,这样的理想流程会极大提高MCI识别的效率和准确率。 研究一通过对大样本社区老人尿甲醛的定量分析,考察内源性甲醛与认知功能之间的关系。研究结果显示,人体内源性甲醛与综合认知能力负相关,且该相关受到个体受教育水平的调节。但由于内源性甲醛在人群中识别MCI的效度较低,且影响因素尚待考察,目前而言暂不适合推荐作为临床诊断MCI的生化学指标。研究二考察北京版蒙特利尔认知量表(Beijing Version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA-BJ)在城市和农村社区老年群体中识别MCI个体的敏感性和特异性,并对该量表进行项目分析、临界值界定、地区差异分析,以及与简易智能精神状态量表(MMSE)进行比较。结果表明在中国老年人样本中MoCA-BJ筛查MCI具有较高的敏感性,但特异性较低,可以推荐给临床医师在诊断中参考使用。MoCA-BJ中有的项目受教育影响较大或具有文化特异性,对这些项目进行符合中国老年人的本土化修订,预期会大幅提升其在中国MCI筛查中的准确性。研究三采用延迟匹配任务范式(Delayed-match-to sample task, DMST)考察MCI被试外显和内隐记忆的神经机制,计算任务下脑激活和行为成绩的相关,同时考察轻度认知障碍对脑区功能连接的影响。研究结果发现轻度认知障碍老人外显记忆受损,内隐记忆相对保留。以组间差异最大的,负责执行操作的尾状核和负责控制提取的左侧额下回的激活值作为中枢指标,区别MCI组个体和正常对照组个体的敏感性和特异性分别能达到90%和70%以上。 在本研究中,由于内源性甲醛作为识别MCI的外周生化学标记需要进一步考察验证,MoCA-BJ个别项目尚需修订,我们综合三个维度的指标并没有发现比单一指标更高的筛查敏感性和特异性。在今后的研究中,细化和控制内源性甲醛的影响因素或探索更为稳定的外周生化指标、修订蒙特利尔认知量表,辅以功能影像学中枢指标,预期能进一步提高中国老年人轻度认知障碍识别的准确率。同时研究对深入理解MCI的认知损伤机制亦有贡献:认知能力与个体内源性甲醛含量呈负相关;情节记忆是MCI最先发生变化且最为敏感的认知维度;MCI外显记忆受损,内隐记忆相对保留。

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Open science, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.315
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.060
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0070.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.323 · 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