MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2750693698 · doi:10.5152/npa.2017.19331

Adaptation and Norm Determination Study of the Boston Naming Test for Tukish Elderlys

2017· article· en· W2750693698 on OpenAlex
Ayten Ekinci, Banu Cangöz

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNöro Psikiyatri Arşivi · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormativeTurkishMultivariate analysis of variancePsychologyGeriatric Depression ScaleTest (biology)GerontologyFactorial analysisClinical psychologyBoston Naming TestNorm (philosophy)PopulationMedicineCognitionNeuropsychologyPsychiatryStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The main purpose of this research is develop the Turkish version of the BNT long form (consist of 60 items) [BNT-60 (TR)] and to determine the normative data for Turkish healthy geriatric population. BNT is a neuropsychological test which was widely used to measure naming disorders associated with a variety of neuropathological events. This research consists of two stages. In the stage of pilot study, adaptation of test was completed and BNT-60 (TR) version was developed; and in the stage of normative study, normative data was collected and norm determination was completed. METHODS: Ninety healthy and volunteer elderly were participated in pilot study and 317 were in normative study. Three screening tests called Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA), Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ) and Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) were administered for participant selection. BNT-60 (TR) was applied to participants who meet the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: According to 5 (age) x 2 (gender) x 3 (education) factorial ANOVA results, main effects of age and education level on BNT-60 (TR) total score were found statistically significant. Then according to MANOVA results, main effects of age and education level on BNT-60 (TR) sub-scores were found statistically significant. On the other hand, main effect of gender was not significant on BNT-60 (TR) scores. The age and BNT-60 (TR) total score were negatively correlated. This results consistent with other normative studies of BNT in the literature. CONCLUSION: Finally, BNT-60 (TR) is adopted for Turkish culture, determined normative data and a test which is evaluating naming ability of the older adults was put into use.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.435
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.321 · 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