Cognitive impairment in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine cognitive and emotional status in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred sixteen patients were examined. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Frontotemporal cognitive changes (CC) were found in 35.3% of patients (medium log rank on the Frontotemporal dementia rating scale was 1.47 [1.92; 1.26], and 4.2% patients had frank dementia (medium log rank -0.4 [1.07; -3.09]). The average degree by the Montreal cognitive scale in patients with CC was 21.7±4.4. 48,9% patients had mixed (executive and speech) symptoms, 34% had frontal (executive) symptoms, 4.2% had temporal (visual and spatial) deficits, and 4.2% had isolated behavioral symptoms. There was no patients with isolated speech deficits. ALS patients with CC were significantly older than patients without CC (64.5±7.7 and 52.5±12.1 years, р=0,0001). ALS progressed more rapidly in patients with CC (13.5±9.3 and 10.4±9.1 ALSFRS-R scores per month, p=0.033). Patients with lumbar onset of ALS prevailed in the group without CC (17% and 36%, χ2=3.94; р=0.047), and patients with bulbar onset of ALS prevailed in the group with CC at the trend level. A comparison of estimates by different scores of emotional state and quality of life (the Hamilton depression scale, CNSLS, ALSAQ40) allows to conclude that CC had no influence on the emotional state of ALS patients and their total 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".