P4‐257: Discriminant validity for the proposed NINDS‐CSN harmonization vascular cognitive impairment neuropsychological assessment protocols
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2005, the NINDS and the Canadian Stroke Network sponsored a harmonization workshop to develop epidemiological, pathological, experimental, neuropsychological and imaging standards for the assessment of vascular cognitive impairment (VCI). From this workshop, 60, 30 and 5-minute neuropsychological protocols were developed. The current study tests the discriminant validity of the three protocols by comparing test performance in patients with recent ischemic stroke (n = 21) to a matched control sample (n=33). Patients (age 50+, 6 to 18 months post-ischemic stroke) and controls completed the harmonization protocols, the MMSE and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). A Barona equation was completed for each subject to estimate premorbid intellectual function. Stroke severity and functional impairment in the stroke group were mild (NIH Stroke Scale: 1.8, sd: 2.8; Modified Rankin: 2.0, sd: 1.8). The groups did not differ in age. The Barona estimates were higher in the control (mean: 113.9, sd: 6.0) than in the stroke group (mean: 107.9, sd: 8.13). A series of ANCOVAs were completed to compare the two groups on the protocols, with the Barona estimate entered as a covariate. The stroke group achieved lower scores on the overall 60 minute protocol (F: 13.87, p < .001) and on three of the four 60 minute subdomain scores (Executive Domain: F: 21.84, p < .001; Memory Domain: F: 23.6, p < .001; Language Domain: F: 4.8, p .05). The stroke group also achieved lower scores on the 30 minute (F: 22.9, p < .001), 5 minute (F: 13.4, p < .01) and the MoCA test (F: 13.3, p .05). These results provide preliminary support for the NINDS-CSN proposed neuropsychological protocols for VCI. In this small sample, the 60, 30 and 5 minute protocol performance of the stroke group was relatively impaired, compared with a matched control sample. In addition, the MoCA screening test was more sensitive to stroke-related cognitive impairment than the MMSE. This ongoing project is supported by the NIH (NS057514).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.043 | 0.079 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".