THE EQUIVALENCE OF CANTAB AS A COGNITIVE FUNCTION MEASURE FOR CHINESE STROKE SURVIVORS: A PILOT STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study aims to investigate the equivalence between Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Changsha version (MoCA-CS) as cognition measures for Chinese stroke survivors. Sixteen stroke survivors were recruited from stroke center in Shanghai, China. Participants completed Paired Associates Learning (PAL) task in CANTAB, MoCA-CS and questionnaire about demo-social characteristics. Pearson correlation and hierarchical regression were used for equivalence analysis. CANTAB-PAL task performances（PAL First Attempt Memory Score, PALFAMS, PAL Total Attempts 2 Patterns, PALTA2）were significantly associated with score of MoCA-CS and delayed recall (β=0.528, p=0.014; β=0.198, p=0.043; β= -3.885，p=0.017; β= -1.600,p=0.026, respectively）after controlling for age, gender and education. The results suggest CANTAB-PAL is a reliable tool for measuring Chinese stroke survivors’ cognitive function. Future studies are needed to establish the equivalence of CANTAB in multi-tasks in larger sample of Chinese stroke survivors.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".