MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2742591504 · doi:10.1590/0004-282x20170077

Cognitive dysfunction in corticobasal degeneration

2017· review· en· W2742591504 on OpenAlexaff
L.M. de Oliveira, Igor Barcellos, Hélio Afonso Ghizoni Teive, Renato P. Munhoz

Bibliographic record

VenueArquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorticobasal degenerationApraxiaCognitionPsychologyExecutive functionsExecutive dysfunctionNeuroscienceDegeneration (medical)Cognitive psychologyProgressive supranuclear palsyMedicineAphasiaPathologyNeuropsychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Corticobasal degeneration (CBD) was originally described as a distinct clinicopathological entity in 1967. Since then, different phenotypic presentations have emerged as possible manifestations of CBD histopathological findings. In addition, pathophysiological findings and the molecular basis have been delineated and several aspects of its cognitive manifestations have been clarified. Thus, not only the spectrum of what is currently designated as CBD has expanded, but overlap with other degenerative and even secondary disorders has made clinical diagnostic certainty even more challenging in the absence of specific and readily-available markers. Cognitive deficits in CBD are now recognized as a frequent initial presentation and may appear up to eight years before the motor symptoms, depending on the phenotypic variant. Characteristic cognitive features of CBD involve language deficits, visuospatial and executive dysfunctions, apraxia, and behavioral disorders. Semantic and episodic memories are usually preserved, while language is often impaired in the early stages.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArquivos de Neuro-PsiquiatriaSame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207