Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Examining the diagnostic value of the mnemonic discrimination task for classification of cognitive status and amyloid-beta burden
Kim S, Adams JN, Chappel-Farley MG, Keator D, Janecek J, Taylor L, Mikhail A, Hollearn M et al.. Neuropsychologia, 2023-11-07
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common type of dementia, characterized by early memory impairments and gradual worsening of daily functions. AD-related pathology, such as amyloid-beta (Aβ) plaques, begins to accumulate many years before the onset of clinical symptoms. Predicting risk for AD via related pathology is critical as the preclinical stage could serve as a therapeutic time window, allowing for early management of the disease and reducing health and economic costs. Current methods for detecting AD pathology, however, are often expensive and invasive, limiting wide and easy access to a clinical setting. A non-invasive, cost-efficient platform, such as computerized cognitive tests, could be potentially useful to identify at-risk individuals as early as possible. In this study, we examined the diagnostic value of an episodic memory task, the mnemonic discrimination task (MDT), for predicting risk of cognitive impairment or Aβ burden. We constructed a random forest classification algorithm, utilizing MDT performance metrics and various neuropsychological test scores as input features, and assessed model performance using area under the curve (AUC). Models based on MDT performance metrics achieved classification results with an AUC of 0.83 for cognitive status and an AUC of 0.64 for Aβ status. Our findings suggest that mnemonic discrimination function may be a useful predictor of progression to prodromal AD or increased risk of Aβ load, which could be a cost-efficient, noninvasive cognitive testing solution for potentially wide-scale assessment of AD pathological and cognitive risk.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Kim, S., Adams, J. N., Chappel-Farley, M. G., Keator, D., Janecek, J., Taylor, L., et al. (2023). Examining the diagnostic value of the mnemonic discrimination task for classification of cognitive status and amyloid-beta burden. Neuropsychologia. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2023.108727
Vancouver
Kim S, Adams JN, Chappel-Farley MG, Keator D, Janecek J, Taylor L, et al. Examining the diagnostic value of the mnemonic discrimination task for classification of cognitive status and amyloid-beta burden. Neuropsychologia. 2023. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2023.108727. PMID: 37939874.
BibTeX
@article{kim2023-37939874,
author = {Kim, S. and Adams, J. N. and Chappel-Farley, M. G. and Keator, D. and Janecek, J. and Taylor, L. and Mikhail, A. and Hollearn, M. and others},
title = {{Examining the diagnostic value of the mnemonic discrimination task for classification of cognitive status and amyloid-beta burden}},
journal = {Neuropsychologia},
year = {2023},
doi = {10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2023.108727},
pmid = {37939874},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2023.108727}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Models based on MDT performance metrics achieved classification results with an AUC of 0.83 for cognitive status and an AUC of 0.64 for Aβ status.
- Our findings suggest that mnemonic discrimination function may be a useful predictor of progression to prodromal AD or increased risk of Aβ load, which could be a cost-efficient, noninvasive cognitive testing solution for potentially wide-scale assessment of AD pathological and cognitive risk.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 43/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Neuropsychologia) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 3 / 5 | 2023 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 37939874) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 25 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100. |
| Total | 43 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment
Also tagged “cognitive-status”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “cognitive-status”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.