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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To study the value of Cog-12 in predicting cognitive impairment in the elderly.Methods At the beginning,56 individuals were enrolled into this study including mild cognitive impairment(MCI)patients and normal cognitive function individuals-involving a control group(n=18),11 patients with normal cognitive function who converted to MCI patients served as a CM group,10 MCI patients with their MCI maintaining stable during the 2-years follow-up period served as MM group,11 MCI patients who converted to AD patients served as an AD group.The patients were scored according to Cog-12,MoCA and MMSE,and their cognitive function was assessed at admission and after two years of follow-up.Results The MoCA and MMSE scores were significantly higher whereas the Cog-12-Ⅰscore was significantly lower in control group than in CM group(P0.05).The MoCA score was significantly higher whereas the total Cog-12-Ⅰand Cog-12 scores were significantly lower in MM group than in AD group(P0.05).The Cog-12 score was a predicting factor for MCI in patients with normal cognitive function(P=0.029).The area under ROC curve showed that the sensitivity of Cog-12 score in predicting MCI was 81.4% when its cutoff value was 4.5.Conclusion Cog-12 is an effective tool for assessing the intelligence,mental state and behaviors of cognitive impairment patients and can thus predict their cognitive impairment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it