MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415615275 · doi:10.1177/10731911251381572

Development and Validation of the IC3: An Online Remote Assessment Technology for Deep Phenotyping and Monitoring of Cognitive Impairment After Stroke

2025· article· en· W4415615275 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dragos C. Gruia, Valentina Giunchiglia, Aoife Coghlan, Sophie Brook, Soma Banerjee, Joseph Kwan, Peter J. Hellyer, Adam Hampshire, Fatemeh Geranmayeh

Bibliographic record

VenueAssessment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitionConcordanceStroke (engine)NeuropsychologyCognitive Assessment SystemNeuropsychological assessmentCognitive impairment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automated cognitive assessments tailored to specific clinical scenarios have the potential to revolutionize health care and clinical research. Stroke survivors experience significant burden from underdiagnosed cognitive deficits. To address this, we developed a digital cognitive battery (IC3 [the Imperial Comprehensive Cognitive Assessment in Cerebrovascular Disease]) highly optimized for stroke survivors, and specifically designed for unsupervised administration in patients with mild to moderate stroke, thus enabling detailed remote diagnosis and monitoring of a variety post-stroke cognitive impairments. In a study involving 90 stroke survivors and over 6,000 age-matched healthy adults, the battery demonstrated high concordance with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a commonly used supervised clinical neuropsychological assessment ( r = .58, p < .001) and close correlation with patients’ quality of life ( r = .51, p < .001). In patients deemed to be cognitively unimpaired based on the standard MoCA cut-off (≥26/30, education-corrected), IC3 detected prevalence of impairment as high as 54% in a subset of tasks ( M = 30.2%, range = 4%–54%). Importantly, performance on the IC3 remained consistent in both supervised and unsupervised settings in the controls, with minimal learning effects over time. This work provides the first evidence of the robustness and clinical potential of this technology for remote application in stroke, and potentially other neurological settings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAssessmentSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207