MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382396608 · doi:10.37811/cl_rcm.v7i3.6555

Validación de la Evaluación Cognitiva de Montreal en adultos mayores ecuatorianos

2023· article· es· W4382396608 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCiencia Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar · 2023
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicAging, Health, and Disability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El objetivo principal de la presente investigación es analizar las propiedades psicométricas y la validez discriminativa del MoCA en adultos mayores en la población ecuatoriana. La metodología fue de tipo mixto, de corte transversal, descriptivo, correlacional y no experimental, la muestra estudiada comprendió doscientos hombres y mujeres de sesenta años en adelante y se divido en dos grupos (demencia y normales) de los centros geriátricos de la ciudad de Cuenca: Centro de atención al adulto mayor y El Hogar de los Abuelos, se utilizaron como instrumentos de recolección: El MoCa-S, MMSE Test de Folstein, Test del informador, Test de depresión de Yesavage, que sirve como prueba de contraste para determinar la validez discriminativa del MoCa-S. Los resultados fueron procesados en el software estadístico R. En los resultados se evidenció la fiabilidad y validez de la evaluación cognitiva de Montreal en adultos mayores.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.342 · 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