Semantic Function in Mild Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well-established that semantic deficits are observed in mild cognitive impairment (MCI). However, the extent of impairment in different aspects of semantic function remains unclear, and may be influenced by the tasks used to assess performance. In the present study, people with MCI and cognitively healthy older adults completed a series of tasks assessing lexical access, retrieval, and recognition of semantic information, using different input and output modalities. Control participants outperformed people with MCI in almost all tasks, with the greatest deficits observed in picture naming tasks. This finding is interpreted as reflecting greater deficits in lexical access and/or access to the phonological and orthographic lexicon, and less severe deficits in retrieval and recognition of semantic feature and associative knowledge. In a subset of tasks, relatively greater impairment was also observed in biological compared to man-made items. From a clinical perspective, these results suggest that, while it is preferable that a full semantic battery be included in neuropsychological assessment, in cases where shorter testing time is necessary, picture naming is the task most likely to reveal deficits in people with MCI.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".