MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774400961 · doi:10.1097/wad.0000000000000223

Version 3 of the Alzheimer Disease Centers’ Neuropsychological Test Battery in the Uniform Data Set (UDS)

2017· article· en· W2774400961 on OpenAlexaff
Sandra Weıntraub, Lilah M. Besser, Hiroko H. Dodge, Merilee Teylan, Steven H. Ferris, Felicia C. Goldstein, Bruno Giordani, Joel H. Kramer, David Loewenstein, D Marson, Dan Mungas, David P. Salmon, Kathleen A. Welsh‐Bohmer, Xiao‐Hua Zhou, Steven D. Shirk, Alireza Atri, Walter A. Kukull, Creighton H. Phelps, John C. Morris

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Aging
FundersAvid RadiopharmaceuticalsNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute on AgingEli Lilly and CompanyUniversity of WashingtonBiogen
KeywordsDementiaNeuropsychologyCognitionNeuropsychological testEpisodic memoryPsychologyExecutive functionsNeuropsychological assessmentAlzheimer's diseaseSet (abstract data type)GerontologyDiseaseMedicineComputer sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The neuropsychological battery of the Uniform Data Set (UDSNB) was implemented in 2005 by the National Institute on Aging (NIA) Alzheimer Disease Centers program to measure cognitive performance in dementia and mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer Disease. This paper describes a revision, the UDSNB 3.0. METHODS: The Neuropsychology Work Group of the NIA Clinical Task Force recommended revisions through a process of due diligence to address shortcomings of the original battery. The UDSNB 3.0 covers episodic memory, processing speed, executive function, language, and constructional ability. Data from 3602 cognitively normal participants in the National Alzheimer Coordinating Center database were analyzed. RESULTS: Descriptive statistics are presented. Multivariable linear regression analyses demonstrated score differences by age, sex, and education and were also used to create a normative calculator available online. DISCUSSION: The UDSNB 3.0 neuropsychological battery provides a valuable non proprietary resource for conducting research on cognitive aging and dementia.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.006

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations674
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer Disease & Associated DisordersSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207