PREVALENCE OF COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT IN PATIENTS ATTENDING PRE‐DIALYSIS CLINIC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Approximately 20-30% of patients on renal replacement therapy (RRT) have cognitive impairment. Less is known about the prevalence of cognitive impairment in patients with advanced kidney disease awaiting the initiation of dialysis. Routine cognitive assessment was implemented in the pre-dialysis clinic, which enabled the Nephrologist and Pre-dialysis Nurse to identify those patients with impaired cognitive function and utilise this information to assess the suitability for self-care treatments, such as peritoneal dialysis, as well as to adapt information to meet their needs. Subsequently, a cross-sectional single-centre audit was undertaken to identify the prevalence of cognitive impairment in 132 consecutive new referrals to the pre-dialysis clinic using the Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE). Twenty percent (95% CI = 0.13, 0.27) were classified as cognitively impaired. Those with cognitive impairment were significantly older, and had lower eGFR and higher serum creatinine. It can be concluded that approximately 1 in 5 patients attending the pre-dialysis clinic has cognitive impairment, which may not be apparent on a routine clinical history. Cognitive function assessment is recommended for all, but particularly to the older patient, before advising on choice of dialysis modality or opting for conservative treatment.
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".