MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400006360 · doi:10.1093/arclin/acae051

Mini-SEA: Validity and Normative Data for the French-Quebec Population Aged 50 Years and Above

2024· article· en· W4400006360 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Hannah Mulet‐Perreault, M. Landry, Robert Laforce, Joël Macoir, Carol Hudon

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Clinical Neuropsychology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsQuebec Rehabilitation Research NetworkCentre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-NationaleUniversité LavalCentres Intégré Universitaires de Santé et de Services SociauxMinistère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité Sociale (Québec)
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversité Laval
KeywordsNormativePsychologyPopulationCognitionDevelopmental psychologyDiscriminant validityPsychometricsClinical psychologyGerontologyDemographyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The mini Social cognition & Emotional Assessment (mini-SEA) is a social cognition battery which assesses theory of mind and emotion recognition. Currently, no psychometrically validated measure of social cognition with adapted normative data exists for the middle-aged and elderly French-Quebec population. This project aims to determine the known-group discriminant validity of a cultural and linguistic adaptation of the mini-SEA between cognitively healthy people, those with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or living with Alzheimer's Disease (AD). This study also aims to examine the stability of mini-SEA's performance over a 3-4-month time period, as well as to produce normative data for French-Quebec people aged 50 years. Normative data are derived for the full and an abbreviated version of the Faux Pas subtest. METHOD: The sample included 211 French-speaking participants from Quebec (Canada) aged 50 to 89 years. Mini-SEA's performance between a sub-sample of cognitively healthy people (n = 20), those with MCI (n = 20) or with AD (n = 20) was compared. A sub-sample of cognitively healthy people (n = 30) performed the task twice to estimate test-retest reliability. Socio-demographic variables' effects on scores were examined to produce normative data in the form of regression equations or percentile ranks. RESULTS: Significant differences emerged between cognitively healthy people and those with MCI or AD. Moreover, scores were relatively stable over a period of 3 to 4 months. Finally, for the normative data, age, gender, and education were associated with performance on the mini-SEA or its subtests. CONCLUSIONS: This study improves and standardizes social cognition's assessment among French-Quebec individuals, which will help characterize their cognitive profile.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Clinical NeuropsychologySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207