MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Neurocognitive Changes after Lung Transplantation

2014· article· en· W2158974827 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the American Thoracic Society · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsNeurocognitiveDeliriumLung transplantationLung functionLungCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE: Neurocognitive impairments are associated with reduced quality of life and may adversely affect medical compliance, but their prevalence after lung transplantation has not been extensively studied. OBJECTIVES: To examine the frequency of neurocognitive impairment after lung transplantation and to examine perioperative factors affecting post-transplant neurocognitive function. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We performed serial assessments of neurocognitive function in a consecutive series of 47 subjects who received transplants between March 2013 and November 2013 (45% women; mean age, 53.5 ± 17.2 yr). Neurocognitive function was assessed using a composite measure including the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) total score and Trail Making Test parts A and B obtained before transplant, at hospital discharge, and 3 months after discharge. The presence of neurocognitive impairment was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Battery (MoCA), and in-hospital delirium was assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method. Results demonstrated that neurocognitive performance initially worsened among non-cystic fibrosis patients and improved over follow-up (P = 0.002). Time effects were strongest on Trail Making Test part B (P < 0.001) and the RBANS (P = 0.054). Participants who exhibited delirium during their hospitalization showed poorer performance during follow-up assessments (P = 0.006). Examination of cognitive impairment rates demonstrated that 21 participants (45%) exhibited neurocognitive impairment (MoCA < 26) before lung transplant, whereas 27 (57%) participants exhibited impairment after transplantation, and 19 (57%) participants continued to neurocognitive impairment during a 3-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Neurocognitive impairments are prevalent among lung transplant candidates and appear to worsen in some patients after transplant. Delirium during hospitalization is associated with worse neurocognitive function after transplant among patients without cystic fibrosis.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations56
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the American Thoracic SocietySame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207