MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7111997824

Artificial intelligence-based prediction of cognitive frailty: a clinical data approach

2025· article· en· W7111997824 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversiti Putra Malaysia Institutional Repository (Universiti Putra Malaysia) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentPredictive powerRobustness (evolution)CohortSupport vector machineScale (ratio)Predictive modelling
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cognitive frailty (CF), defined as the co-existence of physical frailty and cognitive impairment without dementia, has two subtypes: reversible cognitive frailty (RCF) and potentially reversible cognitive frailty (PRCF). This study aimed to develop machine learning models for the early prediction of CF by incorporating both RCF and PRCF into a unified framework. Data from 2,173 participants were sourced from the AGELESS and MELoR cohort studies, including clinical, blood, urine, and health status information. Participants were grouped into six CF categories based on the FRAIL scale and MoCA scores from 2020 and 2022. Seven machine learning models, SVM, LR, KNN, RF, CART, LDA, and GNB, were trained using clinical, blood, and urine datasets. Clinical variables outperformed other data types, with SVM, LR, and CART models achieving 95% accuracy and AUC scores of 1.0, while blood- and urine-based models showed lower performance (AUCs of 0.8 and 0.89, respectively). F1 scores and ROC analysis confirmed the robustness of the clinical models, and k-fold and grid search cross-validations showed consistent performance on unseen data, indicating no overfitting. These findings highlight the superior predictive power of clinical variables for identifying both subtypes of CF, supporting their potential for use in early, accurate diagnosis. Nonetheless, external validation using independent cohorts is recommended to ensure broader applicability.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversiti Putra Malaysia Institutional Repository (Universiti Putra Malaysia)Same topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207