MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981857962 · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.16.3.323

Values for Comparison of WAIS-III Index Scores With Overall Means.

2004· article· en· W1981857962 on OpenAlexaff
R. Stewart Longman

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Assessment · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreCalgary General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWechsler Adult Intelligence ScalePsychologyInterpretabilityIndex (typography)PopulationPsychometricsStatisticsClinical psychologyAudiologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryCognitionMedicineArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale--Third Edition (WAIS-III; Wechsler, 1997b) provides factor-based index scores but allows only for pairwise comparison of these scores, producing inflated Type I error rates and reducing profile interpretability. This article provides tables for simultaneous comparison to the overall mean index score, thus reducing error rates and aiding interpretation. The Working Memory Index or Processing Speed Index can also be specifically compared when an individual is believed to have a condition, such as a learning disability or traumatic brain injury, associated with the selective depression of these indexes. Tables for the infrequency of specific differences are also provided, allowing the practitioner to note how unusual an obtained difference is in the general population.

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)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1300.030

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations12
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological AssessmentSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207