MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282579733 · doi:10.1093/arclin/acac019

Neurocognitive Profiles Associated With Limited English Proficiency in Cognitively Intact Adults

2022· article· en· W4282579733 on OpenAlexaff
Maame Brantuo, Kelly Y. An, Renée K. Biss, Sami Ali, László A. Erdődi

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Clinical Neuropsychology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurocognitivePsychologyMediationNeuropsychologyCognitionClinical psychologyPopulationVerbal learningAudiologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to examine the neurocognitive profiles associated with limited English proficiency (LEP). METHOD: A brief neuropsychological battery including measures with high (HVM) and low verbal mediation (LVM) was administered to 80 university students: 40 native speakers of English (NSEs) and 40 with LEP. RESULTS: Consistent with previous research, individuals with LEP performed more poorly on HVM measures and equivalent to NSEs on LVM measures-with some notable exceptions. CONCLUSIONS: Low scores on HVM tests should not be interpreted as evidence of acquired cognitive impairment in individuals with LEP, because these measures may systematically underestimate cognitive ability in this population. These findings have important clinical and educational implications.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Clinical NeuropsychologySame topicNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismFrench-language works237,207