MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2751476489 · doi:10.36104/amc.2016.693

Confiabilidad, validez de criterio y discriminante del Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test, en un grupo de Adultos de Bogotá.

2017· article· es· W2751476489 on OpenAlex

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

VenueActa Médica Colombiana · 2017
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicAging, Health, and Disability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introducción: El MoCA-Test, es un instrumento breve de tamizaje, utilizado para la detección de cambios cognoscitivos en adultos mayores. Diferentes validaciones han demostrado que es un instrumento sensible y específico, para detectar el deterioro cognoscitivo leve, con puntos de corte que varían según las diferentes poblaciones estudiadas. Objetivo: Evaluar la confiabilidad y validez discriminante del MoCA-test, en un grupo de adultos de Bogotá, con diferentes escolaridades. Material y Métodos: Se evaluaron 1174 adultos mayores de 50 años, autónomos de las diferentes localidades de Bogotá, por medio de la aplicación del MoCA-Test y el MMSE. Los sujetos con puntajes

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.329 · 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