MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Application of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment in vascular cognitive impairment

2015· article· en· W3030877139 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yehui Liu, Hui Sun, Yanguo Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueInt J Cerebrovasc Dis · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitive impairmentCognitionNeuropsychologyNeuropsychological assessmentCognitive Assessment SystemPsychologyNeurologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vascular cognitive impairment has been a research hotspot in the field of neurology in recent years. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment is a rapid screening tool for detecting mild cognitive impairment. Now it has been widely used in the evaluation of vascular cognitive impairment. This article reviews the content, features, application status, and development prospects of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Key words: Cognition Disorders; Cerebrovascular Disorders; Stroke; Brain Ischemia; Neuropsychological Tests

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInt J Cerebrovasc DisSame topicNeurological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207