MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2356657065

Analysis of cognitive dysfunction in patients with silent cerebral infarction

2010· article· en· W2356657065 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Guo Zheng-liang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Apoplexy and Nervous Diseases · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMedicineInternal medicineBlood pressureLogistic regressionCognitionCardiologyCerebral infarctionStroke (engine)Blood sugarCarotid arteriesDiabetes mellitusCognitive impairmentIschemiaPsychiatryDisease
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To study in depth the relationship between silent cerebral infarction(SCI)and cognitive dysfunction.Methods In gender,age,blood sugar,blood kidney function,blood lipid,blood pressure,EKG performance,with or without carotid plaque,Mini-Mental State Examination(MMSE) score value and Montreal Cognitive Assessment(MoCA) score value,all statistical analyses for 44 cases of hypertensive patients in Shanghai area were performed using SPSS 13.0.Results Demographic and laboratory parameters were similar between the SCI and non-SCI groups(P0.05).However,the presence of carotid artery plaques was significantly more common in the SCI group(15/26) than the non-SCI group(3/18)(P0.05).Meanwhile,the MoCA score value and the MMSE score decreased of the patients before and after 9 months between two groups were obviously different(P0.05).In addition,multiple logistic regression analysis showed that both blood urea nitrogen and carotid plaque were independent risk factors of SCI.Also,the occurrence of SCI was related to MMSE score value after 9 months follow-up and the MoCA score value.Conclusion SCI may cause cognitive dysfunction,which is especially more obvious during follow-up.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 Apoplexy and Nervous DiseasesSame topicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207