MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2372750751

Study of neuropsychological characteristics of cognitive function impairment after ischemic stroke

2009· article· en· W2372750751 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xie Ying-zhe

Bibliographic record

VenueShiyong yixue zazhi · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitionNeuropsychologyDementiaStroke (engine)AudiologyMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationCerebral infarctionCognitive impairmentPsychologyCardiologyInternal medicinePsychiatryDiseaseIschemia
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To study neuropsychological characteristics of cognitive function impairment after ischemic stroke.Methods The cognitive function in 74 hospital patients with cerebral infarction but no dementia,were evaluated with Mini-Mental State Examination(MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment(MoCA) Beijing Version after IQCODE screens at different phase points of 14 days,a month and 3 months after hospital admission or onset.Results In terms of the mutual comparison of MMSE and MoCA during a month after stroke,MoCA was more sensitive than MMSE aiming at cognitive function impairment after cerebral infarction.Patients not achieving full mark of the visuospatial /executive,cube-copying and clock-drawing were accounted for the largest number.They remained rather higher levels during 3 months and declined tardily in contrast with the others according to array and analysis of numeric condition of each component of MoCA.Conclusion There is an extent degree of early cognitive function impairment at the onset of cerebral infarction,which mostly presents as damage of performance ability,apprehension,vision space,portrayal of figure and logical capability.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueShiyong yixue zazhiSame topicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207