Below is the structure of what a Cognitrion assessment actually produces — the same eight sections a clinician reviews, including the parts most software would rather not show you.
This is a synthetic example. Every field shown is one the system genuinely produces; nothing here is illustrative filler.
Kertesz (2006), WAB-R Examiner's Manual — subtest thresholds for syndrome classification · Goodglass, Kaplan & Barresi (2001), BDAE-3 — Cookie Theft stimulus and conversational-speech rating · the classical Geschwind–Wernicke model.
☐ I would sign my name to this report as clinically defensible.
☐ I would not sign — the gaps I require addressed before sign-off are: ______________
Signature Date
These are the parts clinicians tell us they check first.
When spontaneous speech cannot separate two syndromes, the report says so and names the subtest that would decide it — rather than presenting one answer with false certainty.
Every classification carries a number. Below the configured threshold, the software will not finalise without a clinician's decision — approve, override, or defer.
Including the one that matters most: this has not yet been validated against an external real-patient cohort. You should know that before you read the classification, not after.
Request a de-identified sample report as a PDF, or ask for a walkthrough on a live assessment — intake to signed report, about thirty minutes.
Request the sample report → Email us instead