MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ideational Fluency in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

2020· article· en· W3105481910 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Rheumatology Reviews · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLatvijas Zinātnes Padome
KeywordsMedicineRheumatoid arthritisFluencyPhysical therapyInternal medicineLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Neuropsychiatric symptoms have been well documented in several systemic inflammatory conditions, for example, systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Increased prevalence of cognitive decline and psychiatric issues has been reported in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, there is limited evidence of which exact cognitive domains are affected and to what degree. AIM: To test the performance of cognition in the domain of ideational fluency (Thing Categories Test in particular) in patients with RA and compare the results with the general population and to the results with cognitive and depression screening scores in both groups. METHODS: Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 (GAD-7) assessment, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Thing Categories Test (TCT) were used to evaluate patients with RA, as well as the control group. RESULTS: Twenty patients with RA and 20 controls were tested, with 7 and 4 men, and 13 and 16 women in the study and control group, respectively. Average scores in TCT at three minutes were 7.50 (IQR6.0-10.0) and 6.0 (IQR3.0-8.0) for category "blue"; 17.50 (IQR15.0-19.0) and 16.0 (10.0-18.0) for category "round" in the control and study group, respectively. A statistically significant difference was established between the study and the control group in TCT for the category "blue" (p<0.025). The average score for GAD7 was 2.0 (IQR 0.0-5.75) and 3.0 (IQR0.50-6.00) in the control and study group, respectively. The average score for PHQ-9 was 2.0 (IQR0.25-4.75) and 4.0 (IQR2.00-5.50) in the control and study group, respectively. Finally, the average score for the MoCA scale was 27.0 (IQR25.25-28.00) and 26.0 (IQR23.50-28.00) in the control and study group, respectively. CONCLUSION: Preliminary evidence suggests that RA at least partially affects the cognitive domain of ideational fluency. However, further research with larger experimental groups is needed to provide more conclusive evidence.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.599
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.004

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.283 · 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