Applicability of Neuropsychological and Psychometric Tests in Autosomal Recessive Spastic Ataxia of Charlevoix-Saguenay (ARSACS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autosomal Recessive Spastic Ataxia of Charlevoix-Saguenay (ARSACS) is a degenerative spinocerebellar disease with pyramidal, cerebellar, and neuropathic impairments. Recent studies highlight possible deficits in cognitive functions like language. Psychometric tests selection implies careful consideration due to upper limbs incoordination and dysarthria. The objective of this study is to document the applicability of 37 neuropsychological and 2 psychological tests in 8 individuals with ARSACS aged between 20 and 60 years. All tests were rated on 4 applicability criteria using a 3-level rating scale: A for excellent; B for acceptable; C for reconsider. Most tests posed few or no applicability limits with ARSACS patients. However, certain tests (e.g., Leiter-3 and Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices) are not recommended due to significant issues related to applicability. These results may help clinicians and researchers working with this population to select evaluations and tests applicable in this population.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".