Assessment of cognitive impairment in long-term oxygen therapy-dependent COPD patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A number of studies have shown that COPD, particularly in its later and more severe stages, is associated with various cognitive deficits. Thus, the primary goal of the present study was to elucidate the extent of cognitive impairment in patients with long-term oxygen therapy-dependent (LTOTD) COPD. In addition, this study aimed to determine the effectiveness of two cognitive screening tests, the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), for COPD patients and the ability of oxygen therapy to mitigate COPD-related deficits in cognitive function. METHODS: The present study enrolled 45 subjects: 24 nonuser and 21 regular-user LTOTD-COPD patients. All subjects had a similar grade of education, and there were no significant differences regarding age or sex. The MoCA (cutoff: <26 points) and MMSE (cutoff: ≤24 points) scores were compared between these two groups. RESULTS: The nonuser LTOTD-COPD group had a significantly lower MoCA score than that of the regular-user LTOTD-COPD group (19.38±2.99 vs 21.68±2.14, respectively) as well as a significantly lower MMSE score. Moreover, the absence of supplemental oxygen therapy increased the risk of cognitive impairment (MoCA, P=0.007 and MMSE, P=0.014), and the MoCA and MMSE scores significantly correlated with the number of emergency admissions and the number of hospitalizations in the last year. CONCLUSION: In the present study, the nonuser LTOTD-COPD group exhibited a significant decrease in cognitive status compared with the regular-user LTOTD-COPD group. This suggests that the assessment of cognitive function in nonuser LTOTD-COPD patients and the use of protective strategies, such as continuous supplemental oxygen treatment, should be considered during the management of COPD in this population. In addition, the MoCA score was superior to the MMSE score for the determination of cognitive impairment in the nonuser LTOTD-COPD patients.
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 | 0.001 | 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".