The relationship between processing speed and verbal and non-verbal new learning and memory in progressive multiple sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Processing speed (PS) deficits are the most common cognitive deficits in multiple sclerosis (MS), followed by learning and memory deficits, and are often an early cognitive problem. It has been argued that impaired PS is a primary consequence of MS, which in turn decreases learning. The current analysis examined the association between PS and learning in a large cohort of individuals with progressive MS. Methods: Baseline data from a randomized clinical trial on rehabilitation taking place at 11 centers across North America and Europe were analyzed. Participants included 275 individuals with clinically definite progressive MS (primary, secondary) consented into the trial. Results: Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) significantly correlated with California Verbal Learning Test-II (CVLT-II) ( r = 0.21, p = 0.0003) and Brief Visuospatial Memory Test–Revised (BVMT-R) ( r = 0.516, p < 0.0001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis of the SDMT z score to distinguish between impaired and non-impaired CVLT-II performance demonstrated an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.61 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.55–0.68) and a threshold of −1.62. ROC analysis between SDMT and BVMT-R resulted in an AUC of 0.77 (95% CI: 0.71–0.83) and threshold of −1.75 for the SDMT z score to predict impaired BVMT-R. Conclusion: Results indicate little ability beyond chance to predict CVLT-II from SDMT (61%), albeit statistically significant. In contrast, there was a 77% chance that the model could distinguish between impaired and non-impaired BVMT-R. Several potential explanations are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".