MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2355010744

Study of cognitive impairments by using of Montreal Cognitive Assessment in patients with transient ischemic attacks

2010· article· en· W2355010744 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
XU Xiaochun

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nantong University · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitionCognitive impairmentMedicineNeuropsychologyNeuropsychological assessmentAudiologyExecutive functionsCognitive Assessment SystemCognitive deficitFrontal lobeInternal medicinePsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective:To examine cognitive impairment by using of Montreal cognitive assessment in patients with transient ischemic attacks (TIA).Methods:39 TIA patients were tested using Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) during the first week after symptoms onset.Another 28 age,gender and education level matched health people were also recruited as a normal control group.Sores of neuropsychological scaling were compared between each of the two groups.Results:The summed sores of MoCA in patients with TIA were significantly lower than that of the normal control (24.46±2.51 vs.27.86± 1.76,P0.01).The cognitive impairment in TIA patients were prominently in spaces executive function (3.56±0.94 vs.4.61± 0.57,P0.01),memory (3.74 ±1.19 vs.4.43 ±0.74,p=0.005) and attention function (4.23 ±1.09 vs.5.43 ±0.57,P0.01) Conclusions:TIA patients have extent frontal and temporal lobe related cognition impairments and Montreal cognitive assessment can be used as an easy way to evaluate the cognition impairments in this patients.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nantong UniversitySame topicNeurological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207