MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

P159 Development of digital neuropsychological battery: a use case in Indian SLE patients

2024· article· en· W4395084887 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pragya Singhal, Priyanka Srivastava, Liza Rajasekhar, Nallapothula Sai Samhitha

Bibliographic record

VenueLara D. Veeken · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBattery (electricity)NeuropsychologyPsychiatryCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background/Aims While cognitive dysfunction and mood disorders are frequently reported as adverse effects of SLE, there is a scarcity of neuropsychological (NP) data for Asian SLE patients. Existing English-centric NP tests are inadequate for the linguistic and culturally diverse population. This study examines SLE's effects on mood and cognitive functions using an indigenously developed language-neutral digital NP test battery and validated anxiety, stress, depression and quality of life instruments. Methods We recruited SLE patients fulfilling 2012 SLE classification criteria as cases and caregivers (CG) and college students (CS) as controls aged above 18 years and at least 10th standard education. All participants provided written informed consent. Institutional ethics committees approved the study. The NP battery comprised five cognitive tasks: Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and modified versions of attention network test (ANT), sustained attention to response task (SART), picture naming and N-back, and five psychological tests (PHQ-9, GAD-7, STAI-T, PSS-4 and WHOQOL-BREF). Mann-Whitney test with conditional Bonferroni's corrections was used to compare cases with CG and CS. Results Total of 142 volunteers (age: median = 25.0, IQR = 9.0, cases [n = 82], CG [n = 40] and CS [n = 20]) participated in the study. Cases exhibited delayed response latencies in N-back, SART, and picture naming tasks compared to controls. They demonstrated reduced accuracy in all N-back conditions, with significant differences observed in hit rate, miss rate, false alarms, and d-prime scores compared to CS with effect size ranging from 0.298 to 0.736 (Table 1). However, the difference was only significant in the 2-back condition compared to CG. Cases displayed lower accuracy in SART Go trials (higher omission errors) than controls but better inhibition in SART No-Go trials (lower commission errors). No differences were observed in alerting, orienting and executive control functions. Cases showed significantly lower scores in MOCA than controls. Cases reported poorer psychological health through increased anxiety and stress levels and reduced WHO-quality of life scores compared to CG. Conclusion Contrary to earlier research that often relied on isolated cognitive assessments, our pioneering approach introduces a tailored test battery to establish cognitive baselines for Indian SLE patients. Disclosure P. Singhal: None. P. Srivastava: None. L. Rajasekhar: None. N. Samhitha: None.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLara D. VeekenSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207