MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3182690647 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/a94pr

sFEra APP: description and usability of a novel tablet application for executive functions training

2021· preprint· en· W3182690647 on OpenAlexaff
Carol Coricelli, Marilena Aiello, Alberta Lunardelli, Giulia Galli, Raffaella I. Rumiati

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersInterreg
KeywordsUsabilityCognitive flexibilityContext (archaeology)Flexibility (engineering)Executive functionsPsychologyRehabilitationCognitionComputer scienceApplied psychologyHuman–computer interactionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Executive functions include functions such as planning, working memory, inhibition, mental flexibility, action monitoring and initiation, and are essential to carry out an independent everyday life. Individuals suffering from brain injury, such as a stroke, very commonly experience executive deficits that reduce the capacity to regain functional independence. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in developing tablet computer-based cognitive training programs for stroke patients. In this respect, we described and evaluated the usability of a novel tablet application (app) for executive function training, developed in the context of the MEMORI-net project, a cross-border Italy-Slovenia program for the rehabilitation of stroke patients. We conducted a pilot study with a non-clinical sample of 16 participants to obtain information about the usability of the app. Our descriptive analyses suggest that most users were satisfied with the overall experience and the app was highly usable, even with little previous experience with tablet applications. Acceptability and effectiveness will need to be evaluated in a clinical randomized controlled study.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207