Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 22, 2026

A Machine Learning Approach to Design an Efficient Selective Screening of Mild Cognitive Impairment
Published on: January 11, 2020
Clinical research risk assessment among individuals with mild cognitive impairment
Angela L Jefferson1, Hugo Carmona, Katherine A Gifford
1Memory & Alzheimer's Center, Department of Neurology, Vanderbilt University, Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232, USA. angela.jefferson@vanderbilt.edu
Objective:
: To determine whether individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) differ from cognitively normal (NC) elders on a risk assessment task and whether participants and their study partners evaluate risk and benefit similarly.
Design:
: Cross-sectional.
Setting:
: University medical setting.
Participants:
: Seventy-nine participants (NC, n = 40; MCI, n = 39), age 60-90 years (73 ± 7 years; 53% women), and 64 study partners (NC, n = 36; MCI, n = 28), age 38-84 years (68 ± 10 years; 67% women).
Measurements:
: Participants and study partners completed a risk assessment task that involved ranking from least to most risk four hypothetical vignettes for memory loss research (brain autopsy, blood draw, oral medication, neurosurgery). Participants also completed decisional capacity for research and neuropsychological protocols.
Results:
: MCI participants' risk rankings differed from NC risk rankings (p <0.001) with MCI participants ranking brain autopsy higher and an oral medication trial lower. Demographic, decisional capacity, and neuropsychological variables could not explain MCI participant performances. Participants and their study partners had comparable risk assessment performance (p = 1.0). MCI study partners performed similar to their MCI participant counterparts but were different from NC study partners (p = 0.002; i.e., ranking autopsy higher and oral medication lower).
Conclusion:
: Findings suggest that individuals with MCI assess risk differently than NC peers by overestimating the risk (or underestimating the benefit) of brain autopsy and underestimating the risk (or overestimating the benefit) of oral medication. Study partners display a similar pattern. These observations may be secondary to MCI participants' (and their study partners') personal connection to the potential benefits of an experimental medication for memory loss.
More Related Videos
06:58Highlighting and Reducing the Impact of Negative Aging Stereotypes During Older Adults' Cognitive Testing
Published on: January 24, 2020
06:23The 4 Mountains Test: A Short Test of Spatial Memory with High Sensitivity for the Diagnosis of Pre-dementia Alzheimer's Disease
Published on: October 13, 2016
Related Concept Videos
Alzheimer Disease l: Introduction
Alzheimer's Disease: Overview
The clinical diagnosis of AD hinges on the presence of memory and other cognitive impairments. Biomarkers, such as changes in Aβ and tau...
Dementia
The progression of dementia is generally gradual.
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Cognitive Enhancers: Cholinesterase Inhibitors and NMDA Receptor Antagonists
Cognitive Development During Adulthood