MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4206493767 · doi:10.22215/etd/2021-14740

Validation of Smartphone-Based Cognitive Assessments for Individuals with Major Depressive Disorder

2021· dissertation· en· W4206493767 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandra Thérond

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityRoyal Ottawa Mental Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMajor depressive disorderCognitionConcurrent validityReliability (semiconductor)PsychologyIntraclass correlationClinical psychologyTask (project management)Depressive symptomsPsychiatryPsychometricsInternal consistency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cognitive deficits are often present in major depressive disorder (MDD) and negatively impact functional outcomes.However, it remains challenging to assess these impairments in clinical and research settings.Smartphone applications provide the opportunity to measure cognitive impairments in an accessible way.In this study, 24 individuals with MDD and 34 healthy controls (HC) completed the Trail Making Tests (TMT), and the smartphone-based versions, named the Jewels Trail Tests (JTT).Significant positive relationships between the JTT and TMT were observed with a moderate concurrent validity for Parts A and strong concurrent validity for Parts B. The intraclass correlations showed moderate test-retest reliability for Part A of the JTT and good reliability for Part B. This study did not find significant differences between the MDD and HC groups completion time.Lastly, higher sleep quality was associated with a faster completion time on the speed processing task over a period of three months.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.328 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSleep and related disorders→French-language works237,207→