MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388588647 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noad179.0619

INNV-30. DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A NOVEL, BRIEF NEUROCOGNITIVE SCREENING AND REHABILITATION SERVICE IN A CLINICAL NEURO-ONCOLOGY SETTING

2023· article· en· W4388588647 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David P. Sheppard, Myron Goldberg, Tresa McGranahan, Jerome Graber, Vyshak Alva Venur, Karl Cristie Figuracion, Young Bin Song, Jeffrey S. Wefel, Kyle R. Noll, Manuel Ferreira, Lia M. Halasz, Lynne P. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurocognitiveNeurorehabilitationRehabilitationNeuropsychologyMedicineMoodQuality of life (healthcare)CognitionPsychologyPsychiatryPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND Although neurocognitive dysfunction is common in patients with brain tumors, existing screening methods (e.g., Montreal Cognitive Assessment) lack sensitivity for detecting neurocognitive difficulties. Moreover, existing neurocognitive screens provide only modest clinical utility for characterizing individual neurocognitive strengths/weaknesses critical for treatment planning. METHODS Beginning in February 2023, the Alvord Brain Tumor Center at the University of Washington Medical Center (UWMC) implemented the Rehabilitation Neuropsychology Screening Service (RNSS). The RNSS is an internal outpatient service staffed by a rehabilitation neuropsychologist from the Department of Rehabilitation Medicine at UWMC. Neuro-oncologists and advanced practice providers placed referrals to the RNSS based on clinical need and cognitive symptoms. On average, 1-2 referrals per week were received. RESULTS Patients referred to the RNSS have included those with high- and low-grade gliomas with varying degrees of everyday functioning status (e.g., independence at home, goals to return to work/school) and neurocognitive symptoms. The goal of the RNSS is to explore inclusion and exclusion criteria that optimize patient experience and outcomes while maximizing outreach to patients in need of neurorehabilitation services. The RNSS includes brief, repeatable neuropsychological testing (90-minutes) and patient-reported outcomes (e.g., mood, quality of life). A separate feedback appointment is then held with patients to describe personal neurocognitive strengths/weaknesses and provide neurorehabilitation strategies or rehabilitation resources/referrals based on findings. In select cases, RNSS has served as a triage stage for stepped care towards referrals to a more comprehensive neuropsychological evaluation. CONCLUSION The development and implementation of this novel approach to neurocognitive screening and rehabilitation, including the rationale, workflow of patient care, and expected outcomes, is described. With additional quality assessment/improvement, the RNSS may serve as a model for integrating neurorehabilitation services into existing neuro-oncology clinics, and may be an additional guide for patients and families towards neurorehabilitation resources and education.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.341 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207