Bibliographic record
Abstract
Finding a neuropsychology reference book designed for practicing clinicians who are not neuropsychologists is difficult.The only practical and easily accessible options for family physicians are narrowly focused, brief articles on topics such as determining a patient's mental capacity or using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) or a similar assessment tool in a primary care setting. 1-4 Fortunately, Dr Gerhand's practical and accessible new book is available to fill the gap between quick how-to articles and imposing neuropsychology tomes.A slim paperback volume, it's designed for health professionals who need to know more about dementias and how to assess them.For family medicine clinicians, it hits that sweet spot, enabling practitioners to become more sophisticated in their knowledge of dementias and choice of assessment tools, without being too burdened.Given our aging population and the increasing incidence of dementia, along with a shortage of neuropsychologists, a need exists for better detection of progressive cognitive impairments at the level of primary care and other relevant specialties.This book would be valuable for any family physician, as well as for psychiatrists, psychologists, and geriatricians.Gerhand divides the book into four sections: essential knowledge (eg, psychometrics and functional neuroanatomy), types of dementia (Alzheimer's, vascular, Lewy body, Parkinson's, frontotemporal, and alcohol-related), intervention (rehabilitation and pharmacology), and recent developments and contemporary issues (biomarkers, imaging, and determining capacity).Gerhand's website 5 reports that he is a consultant clinical neuropsychologist living in Wales.He works for the National Health Service and in the private sector.He has extensive experience doing research and teaching, and he is clinically and professionally active.Apparently, his years of consulting with health care providers from all disciplines motivated him to develop a neuropsychology reference book that puts accessibility and clarity foremost.He describes the goal of the book as making essential dementia and assessment knowledge available to all health care professionals, with all the key information in one place.He succeeds admirably at this task.So many features of this book make it a great new resource.The book is quite short, and Gerhand's writing is concise and clear.He includes tables throughout the book that summarize key differences between concepts.For instance, his discussion of primary progressive aphasia subtypes gets somewhat difficult to understand, but he follows it with a table that clarifies the distinctions immediately.Each chapter concludes with excellent case studies that demonstrate the reasoning behind choosing one diagnosis over another.In addition, every chapter ends with a key points summary that reinforces learning.Even the choice of fonts and the layout make for a clear and enjoyable reading experience, so the book never feels text-heavy or ponderous.The final chapter on determining mental capacity is excellent, highlighting fundamental ethical and legal principles that underlie such assessments.Because Gerhand is based in Wales, his very helpful legal comments refer to laws from the United Kingdom.For the reader based outside of the United Kingdom, particularly in the United States, those laws vary by jurisdiction, which complicates identifying local laws considerably.Including an appendix with links to laws from other countries would have been useful, but that would be an enormous task.Probably best is that Gerhand simply notes that local laws
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".