MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065690394 · doi:10.1080/13854041003712951

A Model to Approaching and Providing Feedback to Patients Regarding Invalid Test Performance in Clinical Neuropsychological Evaluations

2010· article· en· W2065690394 on OpenAlexaff
Dominic A. Carone, Grant L. Iverson, Shane S. Bush

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Clinical Neuropsychologist · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsBC Mental Health & Substance Use Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuropsychologyPsychologyTest (biology)Neuropsychological assessmentNeuropsychological testNeuropsychological testingCognitive psychologyClinical psychologyApplied psychologyPsychiatryCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of symptom validity assessment has become commonplace in clinical neuropsychological evaluations. However, clinicians often struggle with how to provide patients with feedback regarding invalid responding or effort, because of the sensitive nature of the information that must be conveyed. A conceptual framework for providing such feedback is outlined in clinical neuropsychological evaluations, and recommendations for how to handle complaints are offered. Our feedback model is not meant to apply to individuals referred by attorneys or other non-clinical third parties (e.g., independent medical examination companies).

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.010
Scholarly communication0.0090.011
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0080.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.005

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 head0.359
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.146 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations62
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Clinical NeuropsychologistSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207