MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206845875

Social cognitive and neurocognitive deficits in inpatients with unilateral thalamic lesions — pilot study

2015· article· en· W4206845875 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ewelina Wilkos, Brown TJ, Ksenia Sławińska, Kucharska KA

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Eye Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurocognitiveCognitionPsychologyMedicinePsychiatryClinical psychologyNeuroscience
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ewelina Wilkos,2 Timothy JB Brown,3 Ksenia Slawinska,1 Katarzyna A Kucharska2,3 1Department of Neurology, 2Department of Neuroses, Personality and Eating Disorders Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology, Warsaw, Poland; 3Department of Medical Education, Hull York Medical School, Hull, UK Background: The essential role of the thalamus in neurocognitive processes has been well documented. In contrast, relatively little is known about its involvement in social cognitive processes such as recognition of emotion, mentalizing, or empathy. The aim of the study: This study was designed to compare the performance of eight patients (five males, three females, mean age ± SD: 63.7±7.9 years) at early stage of unilateral thalamic lesions and eleven healthy controls (six males, five females, 49.6±12.2 years) in neurocognitive tests (CogState Battery: Groton Maze Learning Test, GML; Groton Maze Learning Test-Delayed Recall, GML-DR; Detection Task, DT; Identification Task, IT; One Card Learning Task, OCLT; One Back Task, OBT; Two Back Task, TBT; Set-Shifting Task, S-ST) and other well-known tests (Benton Visual Retention Test, BVRT; California Verbal Learning Test, CVLT; The Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test, ROCF; Trail Making Test, TMT part A and B; Color – Word Stroop Task, CWST; Verbal Fluency Test, VFT), and social cognitive tasks (The Penn Emotion Recognition Test, ER40; Penn Emotion Discrimination Task, EmoDiff40; The Penn Emotional Acuity Test, PEAT40; Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test, revised version II; Toronto Alexithymia Scale, TAS-20). Methods: Thalamic-damaged subjects were included if they experienced a single-episode ischemic stroke localized in right or left thalamus. The patients were examined at 3 weeks after the stroke onset. All were right handed. In addition, the following clinical scales were used: the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI II). An inclusion criteria was a minimum score of 23/30 in MMSE. Results: Compared with the healthy controls, patients revealed significantly lower scores in CVLT, GML-DR, and VFT. Furthermore, compared to healthy controls, patients showed significantly delayed recognition of “happiness” in EmoDiff40 and significantly worse performance on Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test, revised version II. Neuropsychological assessment demonstrated some statistically significant deficits in learning and remembering both verbal and visual material, long-term information storing, problem solving, and executive functions such as verbal fluency. Conclusion: Patients at early stage of unilateral thalamic stroke showed both neurocognitive and social cognitive deficits. Further research is needed to increase understanding about diagnosis, early treatment, and prognosis of patients with thalamic lesions. Keywords: social cognitive deficits, neurocognitive deficits, thalamic stroke, posterior, inferolateral, paramedian

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.357
GPT teacher head0.567
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicOphthalmology and Eye DisordersFrench-language works237,207