Reaction time: An alternative method for assessing the effects of multiple sclerosis on information processing speed
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability of a newly developed measure of information processing to detect deficits in cognitive functioning associated with multiple sclerosis (MS) was investigated. The Computerized Tests of Information Processing (CTIP; Tombaugh, T., & Rees, L. (1999). Computerized Tests of Information Processing (CTIP). Unpublished test. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Carleton University) was administered to 60 clinically definite MS patients and 60 healthy controls. MS patients responded significantly slower than controls on the reaction time tests composing the CTIP. Moreover, as the CTIP tests became more difficult (i.e. as processing demands increased), the difference between the performances of the two groups progressively increased. These results suggest the CTIP is sensitive to the cognitive deficits observed in MS and that this measure has the potential to serve as a viable alternative to traditional measures of information processing speed currently in use with MS patients.
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.
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 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it