• All threads and posts regarding Coronavirus COVID-19 can now be found in our new area specifically for Coronavirus COVID-19 discussion.

    You can directly access this area >here<.

computers and dementia diagnosis


Registered User
Aug 29, 2006
SW Scotland
Interesting, indeed, but it raises a few questions.

I can't see that it has any advantages over current methods for diagnosis, unless there is no consultant available.

He said: "The next step is to see whether we can use the technique to reliably track progression of the disease in a patient.

"This could prove a powerful and non-invasive tool for screening the efficacy of new drug treatments speedily, without a need for large costly clinical trials."
I can see the advantages in tracking progression, but not in drugs trials. There would still have to be blind trials and regular screening, and as far as I know invasive tools are not used for screening -- at least ante mortem!:eek:

An interesting idea, but needs thinking through.


Dear Jodie

I applauded you as I read your link. The day must come when we all accept that the ability to compare and contrast is of the essence.

Best bit for me,personally and with which I have struggled over the last couple of years is the statement: "At present a definitive diagnosis is usually only possible after death".

Because I have asked, if you have 99 people declared dead as a result of .... numerous conditions ... but not often diagnosed as having even had a dementia, then how many of those people were previously diagnosed with A DEMENTIA?/??///???

Don't know as yet. But am beginning to ask same question again and again.

How many people having been DIAGNOSED (rude word, in my own personal vocabulary) as having a Dementia before their death, have ever undergone the post post postmortem establishing that dementia. A post-mortem only looks at the cause of death, which may be pneumonia or another visibly obvious to the post-mortem-conductor cause of death.

But those of us who feel there are more contributory factors, still need to ask further questions.

That is where I am at, today,in the understanding of dementia.

Personal, yes, and not revealing much at the moment. But something that I am following ....



Registered User
Nov 10, 2007
London, UK
Perhaps this article maybe of interest to you

What interests me about using IT is that it cuts across manual intervention and is cheaper to administer.

Chances of mistakes are reduced.
I have heard that is some cases.
MMSE tests can be difficult to administer if the questions are not relevant to the person taking the test.
Ask me about the world cup I may not necessarily know much about the event.
Also if a test has to be interpreted in another language.
The answers then need to be interpreted back.
Computer scans and tests eliminate the risk of things getting lost in translation.
Please note I am not a professional in these matters.
This is just a personal opinion.


Registered User
Aug 2, 2006
Interesting that it ranks the computer results behind the doctors diagnosis. One is a fact and the other is opinion. So the doctor (usually a GP)again is the supreme judge. As an engineer I ask when will people learn to trust a machine which will only be wrong if it is programmed wrong.

I also question the 700,000 people with AD. I know it is in a report commissioned by the AS but I suspect it is only the known suffers of AD (I confess not to have read the full report yet)and is probably more. Certainly around where I live I know of at least two houses where there is one partner has AD (I used to deliver the local Neighbourhood Watch newsletter).When I asked if they had contacted the SS or AS, they both said no and thanked me profusely for suggesting it.

I have a suspicion that the government also knows this and if so we are talking about really serious money needing to be spent which probably frightens them.




"programmed wrong" could mean the brain from birth? Maybe. Unproven methinks thus far, so ...

.... we all trust in the ability of this/that/and the other piece of technology (microwave??? to cook our dinner AS PER THE PRE-PROGRAMMED INSTRUCTION MODULE), so why not trust another piece of technology if programmed correctly by an engineer/technician. After all, that's what we do if we require anaesthesia while undergoing an operation.


"really serious money needing to be spent"

We don't do that for OLD PEOPLE.

We won't do that for OLD PEOPLE unless and until the generation of OLDISH PEOPLE who are now dealing day in day out with OLD PEOPLE are heard and listened to.

I do understand your post, and where it comes from. But GPs and Consultants and Social Services and ... so on ... reign supreme, without massive connection with US.