Progress toward standardized diagnosis of vascular cognitive impairment: Guidelines from the Vascular Impairment of Cognition Classification Consensus Study
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
INTRODUCTION: Progress in understanding and management of vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) has been hampered by lack of consensus on diagnosis, reflecting the use of multiple different assessment protocols. A large multinational group of clinicians and researchers participated in a two-phase Vascular Impairment of Cognition Classification Consensus Study (VICCCS) to agree on principles (VICCCS-1) and protocols (VICCCS-2) for diagnosis of VCI. We present VICCCS-2. METHODS: We used VICCCS-1 principles and published diagnostic guidelines as points of reference for an online Delphi survey aimed at achieving consensus on clinical diagnosis of VCI. RESULTS: Six survey rounds comprising 65-79 participants agreed guidelines for diagnosis of VICCCS-revised mild and major forms of VCI and endorsed the National Institute of Neurological Disorders-Canadian Stroke Network neuropsychological assessment protocols and recommendations for imaging. DISCUSSION: The VICCCS-2 suggests standardized use of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders-Canadian Stroke Network recommendations on neuropsychological and imaging assessment for diagnosis of VCI so as to promote research collaboration.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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