MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2142984085 · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.114.006360

Response to Letter Regarding Article, “Serial Montreal Cognitive Assessments Demonstrate Reversible Cognitive Impairment in Patients With Acute Transient Ischemic Attack and Minor Stroke”

2014· letter· en· W2142984085 on OpenAlexaffabout
Leka Sivakumar, Mahesh Kate, Laura Gioia, Richard Camicioli, Kenneth Butcher

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2014
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeurologyCognitive impairmentDeliriumStroke (engine)Minor (academic)CognitionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentAcute strokePsychiatryEmergency departmentLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We thank Dr Regal for his interest and comments regarding our article. 1It is important to consider delirium in the differential diagnosis of stroke and to recognize that delirium can occur in the acute phase of ischemic stroke. 2 We do agree that delirium and transient ischemic attack/minor stroke patients both exhibit rapid early neurological improvement.As pointed out by Dr Regal, these conditions are distinct from dementia and minimal cognitive impairment.Unlike the patients included in Dr Regal's study, however, our patients demonstrated no signs of fluctuating attention or level of consciousness suggestive of delirium.In fact, we excluded patients with dementia as well as any acute medical condition associated with delirium.We, therefore, think that the rapidly reversible single-domain and multiple-domain impairment we observed was more likely related to the effects of focal cerebral ischemia itself, as has been described in the nonminor stroke population. 3he rate of change of cognitive domain change analysis by Dr Regal elegantly demonstrates the rapid improvement in overall cognition in our patients.In our patients, the attention domain was relatively stable between baseline and day 90.Instead, the majority of the improvement in overall cognitive function seems to be related to better recall at day 7. 1 We agree that prestroke test scores would have been useful to quantify cognitive decline and improvement later, although this certainly is a more difficult study.In addition to differences in the attention domain, grouping transient ischemic attack/minor stroke and Central Coast Australia Delirium Intervention Study (CADIS) 4 patients may be problematic, because the latter likely have multiple causes.Finally, the median (interquartile range) in-hospital stay for our study patients was 2 (5) days, which is considerably shorter than that previously reported for elderly delirious patients where the mean was 9 to 32 days. 5Regardless, we do agree that patients with transient ischemic attack/minor stroke should be assessed for transient cognitive changes using the same approach and tools currently being used by Dr Regal in the CADIS study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0250.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.006

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders→French-language works237,207→