Influence of Behavior and Cognitive Therapy on Ischemic Strock Inpatients with Mild Vascular Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the incidence of mild vascular cognitive impairment(VCI) in inpatients with ischemic stroke,and to observe the influence of behavior and cognitive therapy to cognitive state.Methods Of 422 inpatients in the Neurology Department of No.254 Hospital of PLA from July to December 2010,167 were detected with vascular cognitive impairment no dementia(VCI-ND) using clinical dementia rating(CDR).The VCI-ND patients were divided randomly into treatment group(N=84) and control group(N=83).The patients in both groups were treated with the routine nursing.In addition,the treatment group was treated with behavior and cognitive therapy.The improvements in cognition function were compared using Montreal cognitive assessment(MoCA)two weeks later.Results The incidence of VCI-ND was 39.57% in ischemic stroke inpatients.The cognitive scores were significantly improved in treatment group(P0.05),but no improvement was observed in the control group(P0.05).Conclusion The incidence of VCI-ND is high,which strongly influences the prognosis of patients.Thus,more attention should be attached to the clinical nursing procedures.The cognitive function can be improved using multiple nursing strategy,including psychological nursing.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".