MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1204412112

蒙特利尔认知评估量表(北京版)在贵阳农村老年人群中的应用

2014· article· zh· W1204412112 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
方旭明, Fang Liu, 朱英武, 武琪, 徐竹, 陈红群, 楚兰

Bibliographic record

Venue贵州医药 · 2014
Typearticle
Languagezh
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive Functions and Memory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

蒙特利尔认知评估量表(Montreal Cognitive Assessment ,MoCA)是主要用于筛查轻度认知功能障碍(Mild Cognitive Impairment ,MCI)的一种简便、快捷的筛查工具。与传统认知筛查量表-简易精神状态量表(Mini Mental State Examination , MMSE)相比有灵敏度高、涵盖的认知领域比较全面等优点[1,2],尤其是早期发现M M SE测试结果为正常的M CI患者,对于其早期干预、预防或延缓发展成为痴呆起着重要的作用。近年来该量表得到了广泛的应用,陆续被翻译及修订为30多种语言,中文版就有6个(北京版、广东版、香港版、长沙版、台湾版、新加坡版)。

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue贵州医药Same topicCognitive Functions and MemoryFrench-language works237,207