Treatment with enhanced external counterpulsation improves cognitive functions in chronic heart failure patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Chronic heart failure (CHF) has been associated with an increased risk of poorer cognitive performance in older adults. Reversibility of cognitive impairment after medical treatment has been reported, although the restorative effects of enhanced external counterpulsation (EECP) on cognitive performance have not been studied. We investigated the effect of EECP on cognitive functions in CHF patients. STUDY DESIGN: Thirty-six individuals (mean age: 66±8 years) who were diagnosed with CHF and were New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class II-III and Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) Class II-III participated in this study. Neuropsychological assessment was performed in these patients. RESULTS: Patients in the EECP treatment group showed a statistically significant improvement in spontaneous naming (p=0.011) and forward row score of the attention subset among domains of cognition (p=0.020) and interference time of executive function (p=0.012). CONCLUSION: Enhanced external counter pulsation resulted in improvement in all domains of cognitive functions except verbal and visual memory tests.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".