MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065209039 · doi:10.1080/87565641.2004.9651920

Working Memory After Mild, Moderate, or Severe Childhood Closed Head Injury

2004· article· en· W2065209039 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Neuropsychology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
KeywordsClosed head injuryWorking memoryHead injuryPsychologyCognitionAudiologyTraumatic brain injuryDevelopmental psychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children with closed head injury (CHI) perform poorly on complex tasks requiring working memory (WM). It is unclear to what extent WM itself is compromised, and whether WM varies with factors related to the CHI, such as injury severity, age at injury, and time since injury. We studied verbal WM in 126 school-age children with CHI, divided into mild, moderate, and severe injury severity groups. WM distributions were significantly skewed toward lower scores in the moderate and severe groups, although the distribution in the mild group was normal. Age at injury and time since injury predicted WM components only for the moderate group. Survivors of moderate or severe childhood CHI have persisting WM deficits limiting the computational workspace required for many cognitive 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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.276 · 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