Cerebral Microbleeds and Cognitive Function in Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We explored the association between cerebral microbleeds (CMBs) and cognitive impairment in patients with ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA). METHODS: A total of 488 ischemic stroke/TIA patients received magnetic resonance imaging. Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was used to evaluate global cognitive function and cognitive domains. The association of CMB quantity with cognitive function and the impact of CMB locations (strictly lobar, strictly deep, and mixed regions) on cognitive impairment were examined in regression models with adjustments for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 113 subjects (23.2%) had ≥1 CMB. Strictly lobar, strictly deep, and mixed CMBs were identified in 36, 40, and 37 patients, respectively. The presence of ≥5 CMBs or strictly deep CMBs was associated with the MoCA total score (p = 0.007 and 0.020, respectively). Of all MoCA domains tested, a lower score in the attention domain was related to the presence of ≥5 CMBs (p = 0.014) and strictly deep CMBs (p = 0.028). CONCLUSION: CMBs were associated with cognitive dysfunction in stroke/TIA patients, especially in the attention domain. This association was mainly driven by CMBs in the deep region, underlining the role of hypertensive microangiopathy in stroke-related cognitive impairment.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".