Gambling task performance in traumatic brain injury: relationships to injury severity, atrophy, lesion location, and cognitive and psychosocial outcome.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the sensitivity of the Gambling Test (GT) to the neurocognitive effects of traumatic brain injury (TBI) and to examine the cognitive, neural, and psychosocial correlates of impaired GT performance in patients with TBI. BACKGROUND: The GT is sensitive to behavioral deficits in patients with prefrontal brain damage, especially in ventral regions. Patients with TBI and behavioral deficits often have focal ventral prefrontal damage as well as diffuse damage. Analysis of the correlates of the GT in this population has implications for interpretation of the GT in other groups. METHOD: Seventy-one TBI patients were administered the GT, neuropsychological tests, and psychosocial outcome questionnaires. Patients also had high-resolution structural magnetic resonance imaging analyzed for both lesion location and tissue compartment volumes. RESULTS: The GT was sensitive to TBI in general, but not to TBI severity or quantified chronic phase atrophy. Marked impairment was observed in (but not limited to) patients with large frontal lesions. There were modest correlations between the GT and tests of working memory and executive functioning as well as between self- and other-rated real-life memory, executive, and emotional problems. CONCLUSIONS: The GT can be a useful adjunct to assessment of patients with TBI. Interpretation of GT performance in patients with complex neuropsychological deficits such as TBI should consider the influence of domain-general resources in addition to specific ventral prefrontal function.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".