Higher Cortical Function Deficits After Stroke: An Analysis of 1,000 Patients from a Dedicated Cognitive Stroke Registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Despite spectacular success of animal model neuroprotective therapy in stroke, these agents have been uniformly unsuccessful in humans. One possible explanation is the crudity of cerebral measurement by insensitive of stroke scales comprising scant or absent higher cortical-function parameters and the heterogeneity of stroke syndromes and etiology. We sought to determine the frequency and extent of cognitive disorders after stroke and their relation to stroke risk factors, syndromes, lesion site, and etiology. METHODS: We used hospital-based consecutive stroke cases. A tiered, hierarchic, cerebrovascular investigative protocol and a battery of predefined, validated bedside higher cortical function deficit (HCFD) tests with comparison to neuropsychological. Quantification according to the World Health Organization levels of disease model was achieved by a clinical neurologic deficit scale, etiologic scale, and disability scale. RESULTS: Stroke deficit, disability and etiology: In patients evaluated (n = 1,000), the admission Canadian Neurological Scale deficit grading was mild, 11.5-9.5 (n = 696); moderate, 9.5-5.5 (n = 204); and severe, 5.0-0 (n = 86); with correlation to Rankin scale of independent (n = 467), mild disability (n = 345) and severe disability (n = 174) with moderate agreement (kappa = 0.54) between the two measurements. The etiologic subtypes included large-vessel atherothrombosis (n = 264), small-vessel atherothrombosis (n = 262), cardioembolic (n = 122), other (dissection, vasculitis, prothrombotic states; n = 253), and unknown (n = 99). Cognitive Data: 1. One or more higher cortical function abnormalities was detected in 607 (63.5%) of 955 nondrowsy patients. The most numerous categories were aphasias (25.2%), apraxias (14.5%), amnesias (11.6%), and frontal network syndromes (9.2%), with the other categories less frequent (3%). Cognitive impairment occurred without elementary neurologic deficits (motor, sensory, or visual impairment) in 137 (22.5%) of 608. The cardioembolic, other, and unknown stroke mechanistic groups differed significantly from the other groups in terms of HCFD (p = 0.01) frequency. HCFD did not differ between younger (younger than 49 years) and older patients (p = 0.194). 3. Univariate and multivariate analyses of risk factors and likelihood of developing an HCFD revealed increasing age, black race, being overweight, and recent infection to be independent variables (p = 0.05). 4. In 76 patients, neuropsychological testing was performed and comparison with the HCFD test revealed a sensitivity of 80.2% (CI, 72-88%) and specificity of 100%. CONCLUSIONS: 1. Cognitive impairment is present in the majority of all types of stroke. 2. Cognitive impairment may be the sole presentation of stroke, unaccompanied by long-tract signs. 3. Stroke etiologic subtype differed significantly among the subgroups, but in comparison of young versus older patients, no significant differences in HCFD frequency were recorded. 4. Risk factors for developing cognitive impairment in the indigenous stroke population included increasing age, black race, overweight body habitus, and recent infection.
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".