New-onset cognitive dysfunction impairs the quality of life in patients after liver transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) may show cognitive dysfunction. To date, it has not been clear whether this dysfunction is due to residual hepatic encephalopathy (HE) or new-onset cognitive disturbances. Just as little is known about the course and clinical significance. In this prospective, observational study, 50 patients on the waiting list for OLT were examined in an outpatient setting before OLT and 6 and 12 months after OLT with the Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score, the Inhibitory Control Test, and the critical flicker frequency for the diagnosis of HE; in addition, the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) was used as a tool for the measurement of global cognitive function. The Short Form 36 health survey was used to assess health-related quality of life. Twelve months after OLT, cognitive dysfunction characteristic of HE had resolved, but a secondary cognitive decline became apparent and had features different from those known with HE. Approximately 70% of the patients deteriorated in at least 1 cognitive domain of RBANS. This cognitive decline was related to neither a history of HE nor a history of alcohol abuse, but it was accompanied by a decline in the quality of life. In conclusion, OLT improves HE but is frequently followed by new-onset cognitive dysfunction, which can interfere with the quality of life.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".