Neuroanatomical correlates of the clock drawing test in patients with traumatic brain injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The clock drawing test (CDT) is a quick and easy to administer test that has traditionally shown parietal lobe dysfunction. The aim of this study was to correlate performance on the CDT with the presence of acute traumatic cerebral injuries sustained after traumatic brain injury (TBI). METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on 170 patients with TBI of all severity admitted to an acute care setting. These patients sustained different types of injuries (epidural haematoma, subdural haematoma, subarachnoid haemorrhage, intraparenchymal haematoma and brain oedema) in different sites (frontal, temporal, parietal, occipital lobes, bilateral and right or left hemisphere). RESULTS: The CDT total score was significantly lower for subjects presenting subarachnoid haemorrhage (4.80 ± 3.34 vs 7.04 ± 3.14, t(168df) = 4.477, p < 0.001) and for those presenting brain oedema (4.50 ± 3.06 vs 6.69 ± 3.38, t(168df) = 4.214, p < 0.001), parietal injury (5.15 ± 3.17 vs 6.42 ± 3.52, t(168df) = 2.416, p = 0.017) or bilateral injuries (5.28 ± 3.31 vs 6.62 ± 3.44, t(168df) = 2.569, p = 0.011) compared to those who did not. CONCLUSION: This study provides empirical evidence of the relationship between TBIs and results on the CDT, supporting previous studies done with other populations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".