MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202100465 · doi:10.1101/2021.09.23.21263859

Behavioral Markers for Deficits in Speed of Processing in Cerebrovascular Disease

2021· preprint· en· W3202100465 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSpatial Neglect and Hemispheric Dysfunction
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityLawson Health Research InstituteLondon Health Sciences CentreToronto Western HospitalSunnybrook Health Science CentreSt. Michael's HospitalOttawa HospitalHealth Sciences CentreParkwood InstituteUniversity of WaterlooNova Scotia Health AuthorityPublic Health OntarioWestern UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity of OttawaBaycrest HospitalThunder Bay Regional Research InstituteQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSaccadeNeuropsychologySaccadic maskingPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationVisual processingEye movementAssociation (psychology)GaitNeuropsychological assessmentCognitive psychologyPerceptionAudiologyCognitionMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective To assess overlap and uniqueness of established behavioral markers of speed of processing for different aspects of visual information within a cerebrovascular disease cohort, and to examine the link between these speed of processing markers and functional behavior, specifically walking. Methods A cohort of 161 participants with cerebrovascular disease recruited to the Ontario Neurodegenerative Disease Research Initiative (ONDRI) were examined with three types of assessments: neuropsychology, saccadic eye movement and gait. Principal component analysis (PCA) and canonical correlation analysis (CCA) were performed on select variables from these assessments to reveal commonalities and discrepancies among the measures. Results PCA analysis revealed different variable patterns between neuropsychology and saccade assessments, with the first component characterized primarily by neuropsychology, and the second and third components more influenced by the saccade assessments. CCA analysis did not reveal association between different types of assessments with the exception of a modest, but significant, positive association between speed of processing measures from the neuropsychological assessments and gait speed. Discussion Neuropsychological tests and the pro-saccade task can be used for assessment of speed of processing for two major features of visual information, visual perception vs. spatial location. Despite a general lack of association between different types of assessments, combining gait speed as an important contributor to the models reinforces the idea of the link between speed of processing and complex function such as walking, and provides support for the importance of attending to the potential consequences of changes in speed of processing after neurologic injury.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.253 · 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