The effects of mild and severe traumatic brain injury on speed of information processing as measured by the computerized tests of information processing (CTIP)☆
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In spite of the fact that reaction time (RT) measures are sensitive to the effects of traumatic brain injury (TBI), few RT procedures have been developed for use in standard clinical evaluations. The computerized test of information processing (CTIP) [Tombaugh, T. N., & Rees, L. (2000). Manual for the computerized tests of information processing (CTIP). Ottawa, Ont.: Carleton University] was designed to measure the degree to which TBI decreases the speed at which information is processed. The CTIP consists of three computerized programs that progressively increase the amount of information that is processed. Results of the current study demonstrated that RT increased as the difficulty of the CTIP tests increased (known as the complexity effect), and as severity of injury increased (from mild to severe TBI). The current study also demonstrated the importance of selecting a non-biased measure of variability. Overall, findings suggest that the CTIP is an easy to administer and sensitive measure of information processing speed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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 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".