Assessment of strategic self-regulation in traumatic brain injury: Its relationship to injury severity and psychosocial outcome.
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
Standard neuropsychological tests administered in a constrained and artificial laboratory environment are often insensitive to the real-life deficits faced by patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). The Revised Strategy Application Test (R-SAT) creates an unstructured environment in the laboratory in which environmental cues and internal habits oppose the most efficient strategy, thus mimicking the real-life situations that are problematic for patients with TBI. In this study, R-SAT performance was related both to severity of TBI (i.e., depth of coma) sustained 2-3 years earlier and to quality of life outcome as assessed by the Sickness Impact Profile. This relationship held after accounting for variance attributable to TBI-related slowing and inattention. These findings support the validity of the R-SAT and suggest that behavioral correlates of quality of life outcome in TBI can be assessed in the laboratory with unstructured tasks.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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