Changes in cognitive status across clinical stages in COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: COPD has been found to cause a general cognitive decline especially in cognitive functions like attention, psychomotor speed, memory and learning, visuospatial and constructional abilities, executive functions, and language skills. Clinical severity has been proposed as the main factor influencing cognitive impairment on COPD subjects. Aim and objectives: To compare the changes on cognitive status across two different clinical situations on COPD patients with severe and very severe COPD (GOLD 3 and GOLD 4, respectively). Methods: 70 COPD patients were evaluated at admission due to an Acute Exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) and in stable stage. Montreal Cognitive Assessment was used to assess cognitive functions. The AECOPD measures were performed at hospital and stable measures were performed at patients home. Results: significant differences on cognitive status between both COPD severities at exacerbation (21.77 ± 2.30 vs 18.75 ± 3.60) with lower cognitive performance on MoCA total score on GOLD 4 patients . While, no significant differences were found on stable stage. Attention, language, abstraction, delayed recall and total score showed significant bigger changes on more severe COPD patients. Conclusions: Our study shows that cognitive status is modifiable during clinical situations on COPD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".