MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296295377 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e3182872ded

Cognition assessment using the NIH Toolbox

2013· article· en· W4296295377 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sandra Weıntraub, Sureyya Dikmen, Robert K. Heaton, David S. Tulsky, Philip David Zelazo, Patricia J. Bauer, Noelle E. Carlozzi, Jerry Slotkin, David L. Blitz, Kathleen Wallner‐Allen, Nathan A. Fox, Jennifer L. Beaumont, Dan Mungas, Cindy J. Nowinski, Jennifer J. Richler, Joanne A. Deocampo, Jacob E. Anderson, Jennifer J. Manly, Beth Borosh, Richard J. Havlik, Kevin P. Conway, Emmeline Edwards, Lisa S. Freund, Jonathan King, Claudia S. Moy, Ellen D. Witt, Richard Gershon

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication DisordersNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institute on AgingUniversity of California, San FranciscoUniversity of California, San DiegoU.S. Public Health ServiceNational Center for Research ResourcesCenters for Disease Control and PreventionKessler FoundationOhio State UniversityNational Institutes of HealthTemple UniversityBrown UniversityCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of WashingtonNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNorthwestern University
KeywordsCognitionPsychologyCognitive testWorking memorySet (abstract data type)Construct (python library)Episodic memoryCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyComputer sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cognition is 1 of 4 domains measured by the NIH Toolbox for the Assessment of Neurological and Behavioral Function (NIH-TB), and complements modules testing motor function, sensation, and emotion. On the basis of expert panels, the cognition subdomains identified as most important for health, success in school and work, and independence in daily functioning were Executive Function, Episodic Memory, Language, Processing Speed, Working Memory, and Attention. Seven measures were designed to tap constructs within these subdomains. The instruments were validated in English, in a sample of 476 participants ranging in age from 3 to 85 years, with representation from both sexes, 3 racial/ethnic categories, and 3 levels of education. This report describes the development of the Cognition Battery and presents results on test-retest reliability, age effects on performance, and convergent and discriminant construct validity. The NIH-TB Cognition Battery is intended to serve as a brief, convenient set of measures to supplement other outcome measures in epidemiologic and longitudinal research and clinical trials. With a computerized format and national standardization, this battery will provide a "common currency" among researchers for comparisons across a wide range of studies and populations.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.006

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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations1,305
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207