MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107056180 · doi:10.1177/1352458520973618

Quantifying cognition and fatigue to enhance the sensitivity of the EDSS during relapses

2020· article· en· W3107056180 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah A. Morrow, Devon Conway, Tom Fuchs, Curtis Wojcik, Mahmut Ünverdi, Faizan Yasin, Jeta Pol, Sveltlana Eckert, David Hojnacki, Michael G. Dwyer, Robert Zivadinov, Bianca Weinstock‐Guttman, Ralph H. B. Benedict

Bibliographic record

VenueMultiple Sclerosis Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
FundersNational Multiple Sclerosis Society
KeywordsMultiple sclerosisExpanded Disability Status ScaleCohortMedicineCognitionPhysical therapyProspective cohort studyPsychologyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cognition is affected by relapses in persons with multiple sclerosis (PwMS), yet the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) does not readily detect cognitive changes. Objective: The objective of this study is to improve the detection of cognitive decline during relapses, by incorporating the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) into the cerebral Functional System Score (CFSS) of the EDSS. Methods: This prospective study recruited PwMS from three dedicated MS centers. All subjects had EDSS, SDMT, and Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) administered. Subjects experiencing a relapse were assigned to the relapse group (RG). Matched controls from the larger cohort were assigned to the stable group (SG). RG and SG subjects underwent the same evaluation at relapse and 3 months later. Our main outcomes were a modified CFSS (m-CFSS) and modified EDSS (m-EDSS), incorporating SDMT and FSS, accounting for cognitive performance and fatigue rating, during relapse. Results: The full cohort included 592 subjects; 80 qualified for RG and 72 were matched to the SG. The m-CFSS was significantly higher than CFSS at baseline (median = 2 vs. median = 0, p < 0.001) and relapse (median = 2 vs. median = 1, p < 0.001). The m-EDSS was higher than EDSS (median 3.0 vs. 2.5, p = 0.02) at relapse, where 35 RG subjects (43.8%) had higher m-EDSS than EDSS at relapse. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that incorporating the SDMT and FSS improves the accuracy of the EDSS, by accounting for cognitive changes, during relapse activity.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.596
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.194
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations30
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMultiple Sclerosis JournalSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207