Characteristics of cognitive impairment in patients with asymptmatic carotid stenosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the effect of the Montreal cognitive assessment( MoCA) on screening cognitive impairment in patients with asymptmatic carotid stenosis( ACS) and the neuropsychological characteristics of ACS cognitive impairment. Methods A total of 72 consecutive patients who met the study criteria were prospectively enrolled in the study. The patients were divided into either an ACS group( n =36) or a control group( n = 36) according to the degree of carotid stenosis( ≥50% or 50%) revealed by computed tomographic angiography( CTA). The MoCA and mini-mental state examination( MMSE) were used for cognitive assessment of the patients. The total MoCA scores,each subproject's score,and MMSE scores of the two groups were compared. Results ① There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics and vascular risk factors between the two groups( P 0. 05 all). The positive rate of cognitive impairment( 80. 6%) of the MoCA method was higher than that( 13. 9%) of the MMSE method in the ACS group. There was significant difference( P 0. 01). The positive rate of cognitive impairment( 38. 9%) of the MoCA method was higher than that of the MMSE method( 5. 6%) in the control group. There was significant difference( P 0. 01). ②The total MoCA score in the ACS group was lower than that the control group( 21. 5 [10-29]vs. 25 [14-28],P = 0. 001). The scores of all subprojects showed that the scores of executive function( 0 [0- 1] vs. 1 [0- 1 ]); P = 0. 004), visuospatial function( 3 [0-4] vs. 3. 5 [0-4],P = 0. 004),attention( 5 [2-6] vs. 6 [4-6],P = 0. 001),and delayed recall( 2 [0-5]vs. 3 [0-5],P = 0. 038) of the ACS group were lower than those of the control group. There were significant differences. Conclusion MoCA is more sensitive than MMSE in the detection of cognitive impairment in non-dementia patients with ACS. Using MoCA as an assessment tool,the neuropsychological characteristics of cognitive impairment in non-dementia patients with ACS are mainly impaired executive function,visuospatial function,attention,and delayed recall.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".