MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2563636767 · doi:10.1037/cep0000087

Comprendre le stade compensatoire de la maladie d’Alzheimer et agir pour promouvoir la cognition et la plasticité cérébrale.

2016· article· fr· W2563636767 on OpenAlexafffund
Sylvie Belleville, Benjamin Boller

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchRéseau québécois de recherche sur le vieillissementPfizer
KeywordsPsychologyNeuropsychologyCognitionProdromeNeuroscienceCognitive reserveDementiaCognitive trainingDiseaseCognitive psychologyCognitive impairmentPsychiatryMedicineInternal medicinePsychosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alzheimer's disease begins with a phase of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), characterized by the presence of minor symptoms that have little or no impact on functional independence. The study of patients with MCI has led to spectacular advances in understanding the prodrome of the disease. It has also produced a typical cognitive profile: an impairment of episodic memory, especially delayed recall and associative memory, deficit in executive functions or working memory and certain semantic problems. Recent studies have also examined compensatory processes that take place during the early phase of the disease. Functional magnetic resonance imagery indicates that the brain is more active in persons with MCI than in normal people. Some researchers have interpreted this hyperactivity as playing a compensatory role. Intervention studies have relied on cognitive training programs to promote adaptation and compensatory plasticity processes. These studies have shown that the memory and well-being of people with MCI could be improved by such programs. They have also revealed changes in the level of cerebral activation among persons with MCI who received this type of intervention. In Summary, studies in neuropsychology and in cognitive neuroscience have greatly contributed to characterizing this critical phase of Alzheimer's disease and offer avenues for intervention that could increase adaptation and improve the quality of life of people suffering from the disease. (PsycINFO Database Record

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.003

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentaleSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207