MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2940909675 · doi:10.1080/13854046.2019.1598500

Prospective memory assessment in acute mild traumatic brain injury

2019· article· en· W2940909675 on OpenAlexafffund
Ariane Lajeunesse, Marie-Julie Potvin, Julie Audy, Véronique Paradis, Jean‐François Giguère, Isabelle Rouleau

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Clinical Neuropsychologist · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive Functions and Memory
Canadian institutionsHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsProspective memoryRetrospective memoryExecutive functionsProspective cohort studyTraumatic brain injuryNeuropsychologyPsychologyCognitionRetrospective cohort studyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAudiologyMedicineClinical psychologyPsychiatryEpisodic memoryInternal medicineExplicit memory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Prospective memory (PM) is the ability to remember to perform an intention at the appropriate time in the future. It is of primary importance for daily living, and its disruption may impact functional autonomy. To date, few studies have examined PM during the acute phase of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), despite the high prevalence of this neurological condition and its potential impact on cognition.Method: Twenty mTBI patients (time since injury ranged from 45 to 73 days) and 15 healthy control participants performed the Ecological Test of Prospective Memory (TEMP), a simulated errand task in which participants were required to execute 10 event-based (EB) and five time-based (TB) tasks. The TEMP separately evaluates PM phases as well as prospective and retrospective components in event- and time-based conditions. Participants also completed a neuropsychological test battery. Correlations were performed between cognitive composite scores and the TEMP.Results: mTBI patients experienced difficulty in learning the content of intentions, retrieving these intentions in the time-based condition (prospective component) and recalling the associated actions in the event- and time-based conditions (retrospective component). Retrospective memory composite score was correlated with the learning and retention phases of the TEMP, whereas attention/working memory and executive composite scores were correlated with the time-based condition and performance on the ongoing task.Conclusion: These results suggest the presence of global PM impairment during the acute phase of mTBI, as well as impairment of retrospective memory, attention/working memory, and executive functions, which are key components for PM performance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.356 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Clinical NeuropsychologistSame topicCognitive Functions and MemoryFrench-language works237,207