Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36913425›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2023

Varied performance of picture description task as a screening tool across MCI subtypes.

Joel A Mefford, Zilong Zhao, Leah Heilier, Man Xu, Guifeng Zhou, Rachel Mace, Kelly L Sloane, Shannon M Sheppard, Shenly Glenn

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS digital health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Joel A MeffordDepartment of Neurology, University of California, Los Angeles, California, United States of America.
Zilong ZhaoMiro Health, Inc., San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Leah HeilierMiro Health, Inc., San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Man XuMiro Health, Inc., San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Guifeng ZhouMiro Health, Inc., San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Rachel MaceDepartment of Neurology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Kelly L SloaneDepartment of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Shannon M SheppardDepartment of Communication Sciences & Disorders, Chapman University, Orange, California, United States of America.
Shenly GlennMiro Health, Inc., San Francisco, California, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A picture description task is a component of Miro Health's platform for self-administration of neurobehavioral assessments. Picture description has been used as a screening tool for identification of individuals with Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), but currently requires in-person administration and scoring by someone with access to and familiarity with a scoring rubric. The Miro Health implementation allows broader use of this assessment through self-administration and automated processing, analysis, and scoring to deliver clinically useful quantifications of the users' speech production, vocal characteristics, and language. Picture description responses were collected from 62 healthy controls (HC), and 33 participants with MCI: 18 with amnestic MCI (aMCI) and 15 with non-amnestic MCI (naMCI). Speech and language features and contrasts between pairs of features were evaluated for differences in their distributions in the participant subgroups. Picture description features were selected and combined using penalized logistic regression to form risk scores for classification of HC versus MCI as well as HC versus specific MCI subtypes. A picture-description based risk score distinguishes MCI and HC with an area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC) of 0.74. When contrasting specific subtypes of MCI and HC, the classifiers have an AUROC of 0.88 for aMCI versus HC and and AUROC of 0.61 for naMCI versus HC. Tests of association of individual features or contrasts of pairs of features with HC versus aMCI identified 20 features with p-values below 5e-3 and False Discovery Rates (FDRs) at or below 0.113, and 61 contrasts with p-values below 5e-4 and FDRs at or below 0.132. Findings suggest that performance of picture description as a screening tool for MCI detection will vary greatly by MCI subtype or by the proportion of various subtypes in an undifferentiated MCI population.

Identifiers

PMID36913425
PMCPMC10010512

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
identifiers read7
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.