Abstract WP448: Cognitive Deficits In Patients With Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Can Be Screened By Montreal Cognitive Assessment And Correlate With Functional Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Cognitive impairment after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is common and important for patient management (medical treatment, cognitive rehabilitation, and social arrangements). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was recently applied as the screening test for vascular cognitive impairment after acute ischemic stroke. We hypothesized that cognitive deficits in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage can be screened by Montreal Cognitive Assessment and correlate with functional outcomes. Methods: We carried out a prospective observational and diagnostic accuracy study in Hong Kong over a 38 month period, and recruiting 173 patients aged 21 to 75 years with aSAH admitted within 96 hours of ictus. The assessments are domain-specific neuropsychological assessment battery, MoCA, MMSE, modified Rankin Scale, and Lawton Instrumental Activity of Daily Living at 2-4 weeks (n=74) and 1 year (n=80) after ictus. The current study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov of the U.S. National Institutes of Health ( NCT01038193 ). Results: Unfavorable outcome (mRS 3-5) and dependent instrumental activity of daily living (IADL<15) correlated with visuospatial memory and skill and language domain deficits at 2-4 weeks and with significant cognitive impairment and all cognitive domain deficits except attention and working memory at 1 year. At 2-4 weeks, the AUCs were similar between MoCA and MMSE for cognitive domain deficits and cognitive impairment; at 1 year, MoCA had higher AUCs than MMSE for significant cognitive impairment and all cognitive domain deficits except visuospatial memory and skill. Interpretation: Cognitive deficits in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage can be screened by MoCA and correlate with functional outcomes in both subacute and chronic phases.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".