Large Language Model-Based Identification of Subjective Cognitive Decline in Electronic Health Records Among Older Adults With Normal Cognitive Testing: Retrospective Cohort Study.

IF 4.6 Q1 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
JMIR Aging Pub Date : 2026-10-07 DOI:10.2196/93011
Liqin Wang, Rebecca E Amariglio, Sheril Varghese, Jiazi Tian, Diane Seger, Li Zhou, Gad A Marshall
{"title":"Large Language Model-Based Identification of Subjective Cognitive Decline in Electronic Health Records Among Older Adults With Normal Cognitive Testing: Retrospective Cohort Study.","authors":"Liqin Wang, Rebecca E Amariglio, Sheril Varghese, Jiazi Tian, Diane Seger, Li Zhou, Gad A Marshall","doi":"10.2196/93011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Subjective cognitive decline (SCD) typically refers to self- or informant-reported decline in cognition despite the absence of objective impairment on standardized testing. Older adults with documented normal cognitive test performance provide a pragmatic anchor cohort for electronic health record (EHR)-based SCD phenotyping. However, cognitive concerns are primarily recorded in unstructured notes and are inconsistently documented, making it unclear how often and in whom concerns are captured in routine care.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to operationalize EHR-based SCD phenotyping in an objectively normal-testing cohort using a large language model (LLM)-based natural language processing approach and to examine the frequency and clinical and sociodemographic correlates of cognitive concern documentation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an EHR-based observational study of patients aged 65 years or older with a first normal cognitive test recorded in EHR flowsheets between January 2019 and April 2024 in a large health care system. We developed and iteratively refined a 2-stage LLM-based natural language processing pipeline to identify documented cognitive concerns in unstructured notes during the 12 months prior to the index date, and evaluated performance against manual review. We quantified the frequency of documented concerns within this normal-testing cohort and used multivariable logistic regression to assess associations with sociodemographic factors (age, marital status, insurance, and neighborhood Area Deprivation Index), sequentially adjusting for clinical comorbidities and relevant medications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 15,750 older adults with normal cognitive test scores, 13.8% (n=2175) had at least 1 documented cognitive concern in the prior year, captured in 1.2% (7394/605,177) of notes. On manual validation, the 2-stage pipeline (Med42-v2-8B screening followed by GPT-4o confirmation) achieved a sensitivity of 0.957, positive predictive value of 0.935, specificity of 0.985, and <i>F</i><sub>1</sub>-score of 0.945 for cognitive concern identification. Documentation was more likely in older individuals, those with commercial (vs Medicare) insurance, and those with neurological and psychiatric conditions. In fully adjusted models, Parkinson disease (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 5.29, 95% CI 3.60-7.77), traumatic brain injury (aOR 4.63, 95% CI 3.15-6.81), stroke or transient ischemic attack (aOR 3.46, 95% CI 3.15-4.18), epilepsy (aOR 2.52, 95% CI 1.83-3.49), depression (aOR 1.54, 95% CI 1.36-1.75), and excessive alcohol use (aOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.06-2.06) were among the strongest correlates of cognitive concern documentation. In contrast, obesity (aOR 0.73, 95% CI 0.65-0.82), hyperlipidemia (aOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.51-0.67), and residence in more deprived neighborhoods (higher Area Deprivation Index) were associated with lower odds of documented cognitive concerns.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A 2-stage LLM pipeline enabled accurate identification of documented cognitive concerns consistent with SCD among older adults with normal cognitive testing. Documentation was uncommon and selectively captured by clinical and sociodemographic factors, with implications for equity and the validity of EHR-based phenotypes.</p>","PeriodicalId":36245,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Aging","volume":"9 ","pages":"e93011"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13645317/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Aging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/93011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Subjective cognitive decline (SCD) typically refers to self- or informant-reported decline in cognition despite the absence of objective impairment on standardized testing. Older adults with documented normal cognitive test performance provide a pragmatic anchor cohort for electronic health record (EHR)-based SCD phenotyping. However, cognitive concerns are primarily recorded in unstructured notes and are inconsistently documented, making it unclear how often and in whom concerns are captured in routine care.

Objective: This study aims to operationalize EHR-based SCD phenotyping in an objectively normal-testing cohort using a large language model (LLM)-based natural language processing approach and to examine the frequency and clinical and sociodemographic correlates of cognitive concern documentation.

Methods: We conducted an EHR-based observational study of patients aged 65 years or older with a first normal cognitive test recorded in EHR flowsheets between January 2019 and April 2024 in a large health care system. We developed and iteratively refined a 2-stage LLM-based natural language processing pipeline to identify documented cognitive concerns in unstructured notes during the 12 months prior to the index date, and evaluated performance against manual review. We quantified the frequency of documented concerns within this normal-testing cohort and used multivariable logistic regression to assess associations with sociodemographic factors (age, marital status, insurance, and neighborhood Area Deprivation Index), sequentially adjusting for clinical comorbidities and relevant medications.

Results: Among 15,750 older adults with normal cognitive test scores, 13.8% (n=2175) had at least 1 documented cognitive concern in the prior year, captured in 1.2% (7394/605,177) of notes. On manual validation, the 2-stage pipeline (Med42-v2-8B screening followed by GPT-4o confirmation) achieved a sensitivity of 0.957, positive predictive value of 0.935, specificity of 0.985, and F1-score of 0.945 for cognitive concern identification. Documentation was more likely in older individuals, those with commercial (vs Medicare) insurance, and those with neurological and psychiatric conditions. In fully adjusted models, Parkinson disease (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 5.29, 95% CI 3.60-7.77), traumatic brain injury (aOR 4.63, 95% CI 3.15-6.81), stroke or transient ischemic attack (aOR 3.46, 95% CI 3.15-4.18), epilepsy (aOR 2.52, 95% CI 1.83-3.49), depression (aOR 1.54, 95% CI 1.36-1.75), and excessive alcohol use (aOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.06-2.06) were among the strongest correlates of cognitive concern documentation. In contrast, obesity (aOR 0.73, 95% CI 0.65-0.82), hyperlipidemia (aOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.51-0.67), and residence in more deprived neighborhoods (higher Area Deprivation Index) were associated with lower odds of documented cognitive concerns.

Conclusions: A 2-stage LLM pipeline enabled accurate identification of documented cognitive concerns consistent with SCD among older adults with normal cognitive testing. Documentation was uncommon and selectively captured by clinical and sociodemographic factors, with implications for equity and the validity of EHR-based phenotypes.

基于大语言模型的识别正常认知测试的老年人电子健康记录主观认知衰退:回顾性队列研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JMIR Aging
JMIR Aging Social Sciences-Health (social science)
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
4.10%
发文量
71
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书