MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048744116 · doi:10.3109/17518423.2012.678020

Deficits in two versions of a sustained attention test in adolescents with cerebral palsy

2012· article· en· W2048744116 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Lemay, Thanh-Thuan Lê, Céline Lamarre

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Neurorehabilitation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCerebral palsyPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationTest (biology)AudiologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate sustained attention in adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). CP affects motor control as well as certain cognitive processes such as attention, but its influence on the latter remains largely unexplored. METHODS: Manual (Experiment 1) and oculomotor (Experiment 2) versions of the Continuous Performance Test were performed by adolescents with spastic CP and healthy age-matched controls (n = 10 per group in each experiment). RESULTS: In both experiments, patients with CP showed more omissions and their reaction time was more variable than controls. In Experiment 2, patients also showed more commissions. This problem was not observed in Experiment 1, possibly because of the presence of a hand movement deficit in CP. CONCLUSION: Taken together, the results show that sustained attention and inhibition capabilities are affected in CP. The present study also proposes that eye movements could constitute an interesting alternative for measuring sustained attention when hand movement is affected.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental NeurorehabilitationSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207