Additional file 1 of Anodal HD-tDCS on the dominant anterior temporal lobe and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex: clinical results in patients with mild cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Additional file 1: Figure A1. In both left DLPFC and DATL groups, the achieved MoCA scores in two weeks, one, and three months after the intervention were statistically higher than the baseline score (p-value≤0.05). There was no significant difference in the achieved MoCA scores for patients in the Sham group during the same time intervals with respect to the study baseline. “*” shows the statistically significant cases regarding the baseline. The data are presented using mean ± SD (Standard Deviation). (MoCA: Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Left DLPFC: Left Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, DATL: Dominant anterior temporal lobe). Table A1. Comparison of MoCA sub-scale mean scores between groups. Table A2. The Bonferroni post hoc tests of MoCA sub-scale mean scores during different time intervals between groups. Table A3. The results of Bonferroni post hoc test of MOCA sub-scale mean scores in different groups.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.852 | 0.083 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".