MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7117239023 · doi:10.1002/alz70857_101028

Mini‐Linguistic State Examination (MLSE): Preliminary Normative Data for the French‐Canadian Version of an International Screening Tool for Primary Progressive Aphasia

2025· article· en· W7117239023 on OpenAlexaffabout
Élizabeth Poulin, Monica Lavoie, Lorraine Bavelier, Sophie Ferrieux, Lucie Grimont, Isaure De Marcellus, Cécile Rébillard, M. Teichmann, Robert Laforce

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalKidney Foundation of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormativePrimary progressive aphasiaAphasiaPopulationState (computer science)Language impairment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is a need for internationally applicable screening tests assessing language in neurodegenerative conditions, allowing for homogenized diagnosis/classification of primary progressive aphasias (PPA), monitoring language decline, and providing endpoints in clinical/therapy trials. The 'Mini-Linguistic State Examination' (MLSE) is currently developed within a worldwide network including 22 countries, and our Paris-Québec collaboration aimed at developing the French/Canadian MLSE (fc-MLSE), validating it with healthy controls and clinical populations. METHOD: The fc-MLSE was adapted from the English version using stimuli of similar linguistic complexity. As the English version, the fc-MLSE included 11 sub-tests assessing 5 linguistic domains (motor-speech, phonology, semantics, syntax, verbal working-memory), providing a total score (/100) and 5 sub-scores. The test was administered to 182 healthy controls to generate normative scores, and subsequently to 36 patients with PPA [(nonfluent/agrammatic variant (nfvPPA, n = 8), logopenic variant (lvPPA, n = 20), semantic PPA (svPPA, n = 8)], and 6 patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). RESULT: Testing durations were approximately 8 and 12 minutes for controls and patients, respectively, and the inter-rater consistency was of 92%. In controls, no ceiling effects were observed. The total score and the 5 sub-scores were similar for women/men, and led to stratifications according to age-ranges and educational levels. In clinical populations, the fc-MLSE was able to distinguish AD and PPA patients from controls, and PPA had lower total MLSE scores than AD patients. Sub-scores also distinguished the three PPA variants, showing highest error-rates for motor speech in nfvPPA, verbal working-memory in lvPPA, and semantics in svPPA. CONCLUSION: The fc-MLSE is a rapid and examiner-consistent language test, validated with a large population of healthy controls. It can be helpful for clinical classification of PPA variants, and might represent a valuable tool for follow-up trial monitoring in PPA, AD and other neurodegenerative diseases affecting language. More generally, the use of MLSE versions developed in 22 countries will improve the consistency/uniformity of language assessments at the international level.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism→French-language works237,207→