ArticleCureus2024
Actual Clinical Practice Assessment: A Rapid and Easy-to-Use Tool for Evaluating Cognitive Decline Equivalent to Dementia.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Screening tests reveal the early signs of cognitive decline, enabling better self-care and preparation for the future. We developed and evaluated the accuracy of a rapid (20 s) and easy-to-use tool called ONSEI, assessing the cognitive decline equivalent to dementia in actual clinical practice by correlating clinical diagnoses with the ONSEI classification. Methods In this retrospective observational study, data were collected from individuals who visited three neurosurgical clinics in neighboring prefectures of Tokyo, Japan. ONSEI analysis was performed using a smartphone or tablet. The tool adopts a machine-learning algorithm using the speaker's age, time-orientation task score, and acoustic features of spoken responses to that task. Significant differences in accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were evaluated by Fisher's exact test. Results The overall classification accuracy of ONSEI was 98.1% (p<0.001). The sensitivity and specificity were 97.3% (p<0.001) and 98.5% (p<0.001), respectively. The proportion of correct classifications was consistent across different age groups. Conclusion ONSEI showed high classification accuracy for dementia in cognitively normal individuals in actual clinical practice, regardless of the facility at which the tests were conducted or the age of the participants. Thus, ONSEI can be useful for dementia screening and self-care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.