MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138096217 · doi:10.1002/mrdd.20049

The Amiel‐Tison neurological assessment at term: Conceptual and methodological continuity in the course of follow‐up

2005· review· en· W2138096217 on OpenAlex
Julie Gosselin, Sheila Gahagan, Claudine Amiel‐Tison

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

VenueMental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerm (time)PsychologySet (abstract data type)Intervention (counseling)PediatricsMedicinePsychiatryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Amiel-Tison Neurological Assessment at Term (ATNAT) is part of a set of three different instruments based on a neuro-maturative framework. By sharing a same methodology and a similar scoring system, the use of these three assessments prevents any rupture in the course of high risk children follow-up from 32 weeks post-conception to 6 years of age. The ATNAT which takes 5 minutes to administer may be used in clinical setting as well as in research. Clustering of severe to mild neuro-cranial signs in the neonatal period permits identification of children who could benefit from early intervention.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.393
GPT teacher head0.520
Teacher spread0.127 · 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