MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1481372854 · doi:10.1159/000197886

The Concept of Vascular Cognitive Impairment

2009· review· en· W1481372854 on OpenAlexaff
Timo Erkinjuntti, Serge Gauthier

Bibliographic record

VenueMonographs in clinical neuroscience/Frontiers of neurology and neuroscience/Monographs in neural sciences · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaFrontotemporal dementiaDiseaseMedicineVascular dementiaLewy bodyPsychological interventionNeuroimagingClinical PracticePsychologyCognitive impairmentPsychiatryCognitionNeurosciencePathologyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) is the modern term related to vascular burden of the brain,reflecting all encompassing effects of cerebrovascular disease (CVD) on cognition. VCI include all levels of cognitive decline from mild deficits in one or more cognitive domains to a broad dementia-like syndrome. VCI incorporates the complex interactions between vascular risk factors, CVD etiologies and cellular changes within the brain and cognition. Vascular risk factors towards VCI include,e.g. arterial hypertension, high cholesterol, and diabetes. VCI includes the common poststroke dementia and vascular dementia (VaD). The main subtypes of VaD include the cortical VaD or multi-infarct dementia also referred as poststroke VaD and subcortical ischemic vascular disease and dementia or small vessel dementia. Traditional vascular risk factors and stroke are also independent factors for the clinical presentation of Alzheimer's disease. In addition to these vascular factors, CVD/strokes, infarcts and white matter lesions may trigger and modify progression of Alzheimer's disease.Whilst CVD is preventable and treatable, it clearly is a major factor in the prevalence of cognitive impairment in the elderly worldwide.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.109
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations124
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonographs in clinical neuroscience/Frontiers of neurology and neuroscience/Monographs in neural sciencesSame topicNeurological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207