Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div> Background Early evidence in using online cognitive assessments show that they could offer a feasible and resource-efficient alternative to in-person clinical assessments in evaluating cognitive performance, yet there is currently little understanding about how these assessments relate to traditional, in-person cognitive tests. Objectives In this preliminary study, we assess the feasibility and reliability of NeurOn, a novel online cognitive assessment tool. NeurOn measures various cognitive domains including processing speed, executive functioning, spatial working memory, episodic memory, attentional control, visuospatial functioning, and spatial orientation. Design Thirty-two participants (mean age: 70.19) completed two testing sessions, unsupervised online and in-person, one-week apart. Participants were randomised in the order of testing appointments. For both sessions, participants completed questionnaires prior to a cognitive assessment. Test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of the online cognitive battery was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and correlational analysis, respectively. This was conducted by comparing performance in repeated tasks across testing sessions as well as with traditional, in-person cognitive tests. Results Global cognition in the NeurOn battery moderately validated against MoCA performance, and the battery demonstrated moderate test-retest reliability. Concurrent validity was found only between the online and paper versions of the Trail Making Test -A, as well as global cognitive performance between online and in-person testing sessions. Conclusions The NeurOn cognitive battery provides a promising tool for measuring cognitive performance online both longitudinally and across short retesting intervals within healthy older adults. When considering cost-effectiveness, flexible administration, and improved accessibility for wider populations, online cognitive assessments show promise for future screening of neurodegenerative diseases. </div>
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.956 | 0.448 |
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 it