MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041986423 · doi:10.1016/s0887-6177(98)00041-9

Note on the Use of the Postconcussion Syndrome Checklist

2000· article· en· W2041986423 on OpenAlexaff
James Matthew Sawchyn

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Clinical Neuropsychology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChecklistBeck Depression InventoryPsychosocialHead injuryConcussionDepression (economics)MedicineDistressClinical psychologyPsychologyPsychiatryPhysical therapyPoison controlInjury preventionAnxietyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Symptoms of the Postconcussion Syndrome (PCS) were evaluated in a university sample, using the Postconcussion Syndrome Checklist (PCSC). Three hundred twenty-six participants completed a questionnaire regarding history of head injury, cognitive or psychosocial difficulties, and demographic data. Scores on the PCSC did not vary by self-report of head injury. Females, however, endorsed more frequent, intense, and prolonged symptomatology, regardless of history or severity of head injury. Only 5% of the sample endorsed more than 6 symptoms on the PCSC, suggesting a potentially useful cutoff for abnormality. The PCSC was significantly correlated with the Beck Depression Inventory, suggesting that general level of psychological distress is a key factor in evaluating symptoms of PCS.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.196
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations62
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Clinical NeuropsychologySame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207