MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405478046 · doi:10.52768/2766-7820/3231

Reinforcing the cultural biases in application of montreal cognitive assessment in determination of mild cognitive impairment

2024· article· en· W4405478046 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Evaristus Chino Ezema

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Images and Medical Case Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitive impairmentPsychologyCognitionCognitive Assessment SystemCognitive psychologyAudiologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mild cognitive impairment is the stage between dementia-a severe cognitive decline and the normal aging-related loss of memory and thinking. Cognitive impairment can also result from delirium

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)0.164
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.359
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.870

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1640.359
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.390 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Images and Medical Case ReportsSame topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesFrench-language works237,207