Long-Term Cognitive Outcome of Ischaemic Stroke in Young Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Long-term prognosis in terms of cognition in young stroke patients is very important because these patients usually still have a long life expectancy and rather extensive daily life demands. However, little is known on cognitive deficits in these patients. We aimed to evaluate cognitive function in young stroke patients (<50 years) after long-term follow-up. METHODS: Young adults with first-ever ischaemic stroke admitted to St. Elisabeth Hospital or the TweeSteden Hospital, Tilburg, the Netherlands, between January 2000 and December 2010 were included. Patients with severe aphasia or pre-existent cognitive impairment were excluded. Cognitive functioning was assessed using a neuropsychological examination focussing on the following cognitive domains: visual perception, visual and verbal memory, mental speed, and executive functioning. Raw scores were compared to the scores of 61 controls using a multivariate analysis of variance with adjustment for education level. RESULTS: The 96 participants (median age at index event 43.0 years; 45.8% male) performed worse than controls on the Stroop Color-Word Test Part 1 (p < 0.001) and on the Symbol-Digit Substitution Task (p < 0.001), both assessing mental speed. Patients had significantly lower scores on the learning slope of the Word Pair test (p = 0.002) assessing verbal memory. Patients performed better on the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure than controls (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In young patients with ischaemic stroke, mental slowness is present even up to 10 years after stroke. When counselling these patients, doctors should actively try to assess the presence of cognitive deficits, also after a long period of follow-up.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".