Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Introduction to Large Language Models (LLMs) for dementia care and research
Treder MS, Lee S, Tsvetanov KA.. Frontiers in dementia, 2024-05-14
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
Introduction Dementia is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that affects cognitive abilities including memory, reasoning, and communication skills, leading to gradual decline in daily activities and social engagement. In light of the recent advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, this paper aims to thoroughly analyse their potential applications and usefulness in dementia care and research. Method To this end, we offer an introduction into LLMs, outlining the key features, capabilities, limitations, potential risks, and practical considerations for deployment as easy-to-use software (e.g., smartphone apps). We then explore various domains related to dementia, identifying opportunities for LLMs to enhance understanding, diagnostics, and treatment, with a broader emphasis on improving patient care. For each domain, the specific contributions of LLMs are examined, such as their ability to engage users in meaningful conversations, deliver personalized support, and offer cognitive enrichment. Potential benefits encompass improved social interaction, enhanced cognitive functioning, increased emotional well-being, and reduced caregiver burden. The deployment of LLMs in caregiving frameworks also raises a number of concerns and considerations. These include privacy and safety concerns, the need for empirical validation, user-centered design, adaptation to the user's unique needs, and the integration of multimodal inputs to create more immersive and personalized experiences. Additionally, ethical guidelines and privacy protocols must be established to ensure responsible and ethical deployment of LLMs. Results We report the results on a questionnaire filled in by people with dementia (PwD) and their supporters wherein we surveyed the usefulness of different application scenarios of LLMs as well as the features that LLM-powered apps should have. Both PwD and supporters were largely positive regarding the prospect of LLMs in care, although concerns were raised regarding bias, data privacy and transparency. Discussion Overall, this review corroborates the promising utilization of LLMs to positively impact dementia care by boosting cognitive abilities, enriching social interaction, and supporting caregivers. The findings underscore the importance of further research and development in this field to fully harness the benefits of LLMs and maximize their potential for improving the lives of individuals living with dementia.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Treder, M. S., Lee, S., & Tsvetanov, K. A. (2024). Introduction to Large Language Models (LLMs) for dementia care and research. Frontiers in dementia. https://doi.org/10.3389/frdem.2024.1385303
Vancouver
Treder MS, Lee S, Tsvetanov KA. Introduction to Large Language Models (LLMs) for dementia care and research. Frontiers in dementia. 2024. doi:10.3389/frdem.2024.1385303. PMID: 39081594.
BibTeX
@article{treder2024-39081594,
author = {Treder, M. S. and Lee, S. and Tsvetanov, K. A.},
title = {{Introduction to Large Language Models (LLMs) for dementia care and research}},
journal = {Frontiers in dementia},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.3389/frdem.2024.1385303},
pmid = {39081594},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3389/frdem.2024.1385303}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Results We report the results on a questionnaire filled in by people with dementia (PwD) and their supporters wherein we surveyed the usefulness of different application scenarios of LLMs as well as the features that LLM-powered apps should have.
- Discussion Overall, this review corroborates the promising utilization of LLMs to positively impact dementia care by boosting cognitive abilities, enriching social interaction, and supporting caregivers.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 45/100
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 26 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 45 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Frontiers in dementia) |
| 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 | 4 / 5 | 2024 — within 3 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 39081594) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 26 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 26 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 45 out of 100. |
| Total | 45 / 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 “computerized”
238 studies in the library carry the topic tag “computerized”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 238 tagged studies.