MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Neuropsychologic and neuropsychiatric characteristics of patients withFriedreich's ataxia

2000· article· en· W2022177952 on OpenAlexaff
M. White, R. Lalonde and, Thérèse Botez-Marquard

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Neurologica Scandinavica · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsHôtel-Dieu de MontréalHôtel-Dieu de QuébecCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtaxiaStroop effectPsychologyAudiologyVerbal fluency testMoodPrefrontal cortexExecutive functionsFrontal lobeNeuropsychologyMood disordersPsychiatryCognitionMedicineAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: OBJECTIVES AND MATERIALS AND METHODS: Due to recent evidence of frontal-lobe related dysfunctions in patients with cerebellar atrophy, patients with Friedreich's ataxia were compared to normal subjects controlled for age, gender, and educational level on tests measuring information processing speed, visuospatial organization, selective attention, executive functions, and mood. RESULTS: Patients with Friedreich's ataxia had slowed information speed, as indicated by lengthened simple visual reaction time and increased color-word interference in the Stroop task. However, the patient group was not impaired in several tests sensitive to neocortical and particularly prefrontal cortex lesions, including an untimed version of block design, verbal fluency, Wisconsin card sorting, Tower of Hanoi, and picture arrangement. Despite serious sensorimotor dysfunctions, the patient group did not differ from controls in terms of mood, as evaluated by the Symptoms Checklist (SCL-90) and the Hamilton depression scale. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that the slowed information processing speed of patients with Friedreich's ataxia is not accompanied by major prefrontal cortex and mood disorders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations71
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Neurologica ScandinavicaSame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207