ArticleApplied neuropsychology. Adult
Automated procedure for demographic adjustments on cognitive test scores.
Article in Applied neuropsychology. Adult. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Performances of normal people on cognitive tests are known to vary by demographic characteristics, such as age, education, and sex. Thus, cognitive test scores should be corrected for demographic influences when they are used to detect below-expected results due to disease or injury involving the central nervous system (CNS). Normative corrections, if estimated from a large, diverse, and well-characterized cohort of controls, help to remove expected differences in cognitive performance associated with normal demographic characteristics and associated socio-economic disadvantages. In this paper, we (1) describe in detail the process of generating regression-based normative standards, and its advantages and limitations, (2) provide recommendations for applying these normative standards to data from individuals and populations at risk for CNS dysfunction, and (3) introduce an R package,
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.