Risk factors for postoperative cognitive and functional difficulties in abdominal aortic aneurysm patients: a three month follow‐up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment and deficits in functional performance are major concerns following surgery, particularly for older patients. The objective of this study was to examine predictors of postoperative cognitive and functional difficulties and explore the relationship between presurgery and postsurgery cognitive ability and functional performance. METHODS: 89 patients undergoing elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surgery were administered a battery of cognitive measures preoperatively, at the time of discharge from hospital and 3 months postoperatively. Functional performance was evaluated by the Portland Adaptability Inventory (PAI), both pre and postsurgery. Symptoms of delirium were assessed during the first six postoperative days. RESULTS: A diagnosis of delirium had a mild effect on functional performance 3 months postoperatively. The strongest predictors of postoperative functional performance were the level of functioning presurgery, a longer length of hospital stay and the total number of days delirious. Cognitive impairment postsurgery was predicted by presurgery cognitive measures of verbal memory and psychomotor speed performance and the total number of days delirious. CONCLUSIONS: Functional performance outcomes for AAA patients 3 months postsurgery revealed no significant loss of functioning relative to presurgery levels, although longer length of hospital stay and greater number of days delirious was associated with somewhat poorer outcome on indicators of social and physical functioning. Cognitive impairment postoperatively was fairly mild but when it was found it was associated with number of days delirious and preoperative deficits in verbal memory and psychomotor speed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".