基于步态分析和眼动跟踪的社区老年人主观认知能力下降的有效筛查模型。

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience Pub Date : 2024-09-25 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fnagi.2024.1444375
Chenxi Hao, Xiaonan Zhang, Junpin An, Wenjing Bao, Fan Yang, Jinyu Chen, Sijia Hou, Zhigang Wang, Shuning Du, Yarong Zhao, Qiuyan Wang, Guowen Min, Yang Li
{"title":"基于步态分析和眼动跟踪的社区老年人主观认知能力下降的有效筛查模型。","authors":"Chenxi Hao, Xiaonan Zhang, Junpin An, Wenjing Bao, Fan Yang, Jinyu Chen, Sijia Hou, Zhigang Wang, Shuning Du, Yarong Zhao, Qiuyan Wang, Guowen Min, Yang Li","doi":"10.3389/fnagi.2024.1444375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the effectiveness of multimodal features based on gait analysis and eye tracking for elderly people screening with subjective cognitive decline in the community.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In the study, 412 cognitively normal older adults aged over 65 years were included. Among them, 230 individuals were diagnosed with non-subjective cognitive decline and 182 with subjective cognitive decline. All participants underwent assessments using three screening tools: the traditional SCD9 scale, gait analysis, and eye tracking. The gait analysis involved three tasks: the single task, the counting backwards dual task, and the naming animals dual task. Eye tracking included six paradigms: smooth pursuit, median fixation, lateral fixation, overlap saccade, gap saccade, and anti-saccade tasks. Using the XGBoost machine learning algorithm, several models were developed based on gait analysis and eye tracking to classify subjective cognitive decline.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 161 gait and eye-tracking features were measured. 22 parameters, including 9 gait and 13 eye-tracking features, showed significant differences between the two groups (<i>p</i> < 0.05). The top three eye-tracking paradigms were anti-saccade, gap saccade, and median fixation, with AUCs of 0.911, 0.904, and 0.891, respectively. The gait analysis features had an AUC of 0.862, indicating better discriminatory efficacy compared to the SCD9 scale, which had an AUC of 0.762. The model based on single and dual task gait, anti-saccade, gap saccade, and median fixation achieved the best efficacy in SCD screening (AUC = 0.969).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The gait analysis, eye-tracking multimodal assessment tool is an objective and accurate screening method that showed better detection of subjective cognitive decline. This finding provides another option for early identification of subjective cognitive decline in the community.</p>","PeriodicalId":12450,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience","volume":"16 ","pages":"1444375"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11462412/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An effective screening model for subjective cognitive decline in community-dwelling older adults based on gait analysis and eye tracking.\",\"authors\":\"Chenxi Hao, Xiaonan Zhang, Junpin An, Wenjing Bao, Fan Yang, Jinyu Chen, Sijia Hou, Zhigang Wang, Shuning Du, Yarong Zhao, Qiuyan Wang, Guowen Min, Yang Li\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fnagi.2024.1444375\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the effectiveness of multimodal features based on gait analysis and eye tracking for elderly people screening with subjective cognitive decline in the community.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In the study, 412 cognitively normal older adults aged over 65 years were included. Among them, 230 individuals were diagnosed with non-subjective cognitive decline and 182 with subjective cognitive decline. All participants underwent assessments using three screening tools: the traditional SCD9 scale, gait analysis, and eye tracking. The gait analysis involved three tasks: the single task, the counting backwards dual task, and the naming animals dual task. Eye tracking included six paradigms: smooth pursuit, median fixation, lateral fixation, overlap saccade, gap saccade, and anti-saccade tasks. Using the XGBoost machine learning algorithm, several models were developed based on gait analysis and eye tracking to classify subjective cognitive decline.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 161 gait and eye-tracking features were measured. 22 parameters, including 9 gait and 13 eye-tracking features, showed significant differences between the two groups (<i>p</i> < 0.05). The top three eye-tracking paradigms were anti-saccade, gap saccade, and median fixation, with AUCs of 0.911, 0.904, and 0.891, respectively. The gait analysis features had an AUC of 0.862, indicating better discriminatory efficacy compared to the SCD9 scale, which had an AUC of 0.762. The model based on single and dual task gait, anti-saccade, gap saccade, and median fixation achieved the best efficacy in SCD screening (AUC = 0.969).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The gait analysis, eye-tracking multimodal assessment tool is an objective and accurate screening method that showed better detection of subjective cognitive decline. This finding provides another option for early identification of subjective cognitive decline in the community.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12450,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"1444375\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11462412/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2024.1444375\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2024.1444375","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评估基于步态分析和眼动跟踪的多模态特征对社区中主观认知能力下降的老年人筛查的有效性:研究纳入了 412 名 65 岁以上认知正常的老年人。其中,230 人被诊断为非主观认知衰退,182 人被诊断为主观认知衰退。所有参与者都接受了三种筛查工具的评估:传统的 SCD9 量表、步态分析和眼动追踪。步态分析包括三项任务:单一任务、倒数双重任务和命名动物双重任务。眼动追踪包括六种范式:平滑追逐、中线固定、侧向固定、重叠囊瞄、间隙囊瞄、反囊瞄任务。利用 XGBoost 机器学习算法,基于步态分析和眼动追踪建立了多个模型,用于对主观认知能力下降进行分类:结果:共测量了 161 个步态和眼动特征。包括 9 个步态特征和 13 个眼动特征在内的 22 个参数在两组之间存在显著差异(p 结论:步态分析、眼动特征和认知功能衰退模型在两组之间存在显著差异:步态分析和眼动追踪多模态评估工具是一种客观准确的筛查方法,能更好地发现主观认知能力下降。这一发现为在社区中早期识别主观认知能力下降提供了另一种选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An effective screening model for subjective cognitive decline in community-dwelling older adults based on gait analysis and eye tracking.

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of multimodal features based on gait analysis and eye tracking for elderly people screening with subjective cognitive decline in the community.

Methods: In the study, 412 cognitively normal older adults aged over 65 years were included. Among them, 230 individuals were diagnosed with non-subjective cognitive decline and 182 with subjective cognitive decline. All participants underwent assessments using three screening tools: the traditional SCD9 scale, gait analysis, and eye tracking. The gait analysis involved three tasks: the single task, the counting backwards dual task, and the naming animals dual task. Eye tracking included six paradigms: smooth pursuit, median fixation, lateral fixation, overlap saccade, gap saccade, and anti-saccade tasks. Using the XGBoost machine learning algorithm, several models were developed based on gait analysis and eye tracking to classify subjective cognitive decline.

Results: A total of 161 gait and eye-tracking features were measured. 22 parameters, including 9 gait and 13 eye-tracking features, showed significant differences between the two groups (p < 0.05). The top three eye-tracking paradigms were anti-saccade, gap saccade, and median fixation, with AUCs of 0.911, 0.904, and 0.891, respectively. The gait analysis features had an AUC of 0.862, indicating better discriminatory efficacy compared to the SCD9 scale, which had an AUC of 0.762. The model based on single and dual task gait, anti-saccade, gap saccade, and median fixation achieved the best efficacy in SCD screening (AUC = 0.969).

Conclusion: The gait analysis, eye-tracking multimodal assessment tool is an objective and accurate screening method that showed better detection of subjective cognitive decline. This finding provides another option for early identification of subjective cognitive decline in the community.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-NEUROSCIENCES
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
1426
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience is a leading journal in its field, publishing rigorously peer-reviewed research that advances our understanding of the mechanisms of Central Nervous System aging and age-related neural diseases. Specialty Chief Editor Thomas Wisniewski at the New York University School of Medicine is supported by an outstanding Editorial Board of international researchers. This multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信