MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Neurocognitive impairment in Chinese patients with obstructive sleep apnoea hypopnoea syndrome

2011· article· en· W2128885714 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRespirology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentNeurocognitiveCohortCognitionCognitive impairmentAudiologyStepwise regressionPolysomnographyPhysical therapyInternal medicinePediatricsPsychiatryApnea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Sleep-disordered breathing is known to be associated with impairment in cognitive function. The aim of this study was to characterize neurocognitive impairment in a cohort of Chinese patients with varying severities of obstructive sleep apnoea hypopnoea syndrome (OSAHS), and to develop a sensitive instrument for routine screening of cognitive impairment. METHODS: Eligible patients (n = 394) were categorized into a primary snoring group, and mild, moderate and severe OSAHS groups, based on assessment of AHI. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) questionnaires were administered to assess cognitive function, and the correlations between questionnaire scores and clinical and polysomnographic parameters were further evaluated by stepwise multivariate regression. RESULTS: MoCA scores decreased progressively across the spectrum from primary snoring to severe OSAHS. Importantly, mild neurocognitive impairment as defined by a MoCA score <26 was more common in the moderate (38.6%) and severe (41.4%) OSAHS groups than in the mild OSAHS (25.0%) and primary snoring (15.2%) groups. In contrast, MMSE scores were largely normal and comparable among all four groups. Evaluation of MoCA subdomains further revealed selective reduction in memory/delayed recall, visuospatial and executive function, and attention span in the severe OSAHS group compared with the other groups. Stepwise multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that MoCA scores correlated significantly with lowest oxygen saturation (L-SaO(2) ) and years of education. CONCLUSIONS: Neurocognitive impairment is common in patients with OSAHS. The MoCA is a brief and sensitive tool for the assessment of cognitive impairment in OSAHS patients, whose performance on the MMSE is in the normal range.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it