AVALIAÇÃO NEUROPSICOLÓGICA ADEQUADA ÀS DEMÊNCIAS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
du Montreal e mostram a possibilidade de sua aplicação no Brasil para a Avaliação Neuropsicológica Adequada às Demências(ANAD). A importância dessa avaliação no exame neuropsicológico das demências, sobretudo do tipo Alzheimer, é traçar o perfil cognitivo tanto em base transversal como longitudinal. Acreditam que a prática dessa avaliação será de relevância no progresso da pesquisa neurológica, como para esclarecer o espaço virtual entre os limites do envelhecimento normal e patológico. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Alzheimer, demências, envelhecimento. Optimal neuropsychological evaluation of dementias SUMMARY- The authors discuss the protocol of the Optimal Neuropsychological Evaluation of Dementias of Montreal and its possible application in Brazil. This protocol is important for evaluation in neuropsychological evolution of dementia of the Alzheimer type and for bringing to the fore distinct affectted cognitive profiles as much on a tranversal base as longitudinal. The authors believe that its application would contribute to the progress of research in neurology, as in the clear distinction between normal aging and pathological aging. KEY WORDS: Alzheimer, dementias, aging. Na demencia o paciente perde as funções cognitivas que armazenam o conhecimento humano, a tal ponto que ele chega a não exercer as mais simples tarefas diárias. No começo da síndrome
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 | 0.007 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".