MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2386457269

Extraction and distribution of vascular mild cognitive impairment syndrome factors based on factor analysis

2013· article· en· W2386457269 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yunling Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueZhonghua zhongyiyao zazhi · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraditional Chinese Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlood stasisPhlegmMedicineYin deficiencyCognitive impairmentInternal medicineTraditional Chinese medicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentYang deficiencyCognitionGastroenterologyTraditional medicinePathologyDiseasePsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective:To explore the syndrome factors distribution for vascular mild cognitive impairment,in order to provide the evidence for the standardization of syndrome differentation.Methods:803 cases of vascular mild cognitive impairment were selected from multi-centers.Factor analysis was used to find out the common syndrome factors.Then,the distribution of syndrome factors was summary.Results:The distribution of the 6 syndrome factors were:patients with qi deficiency up to 25.90%, followed by blood stasis(18.31%),phlegm(16.94%),yin deficiency(14.32%),yang deficiency(13.57%),fire(10.96%).The main involved organs were the kidney and liver,followed by the heart and spleen.Patients with higher MoCA score manifested commonly as qi deficiency,phlegm,blood stasis.Patients with lower MoCA score manifested commonly as qi deficiency,yang deficiency,blood stasis.There was positively correlation between the number of damaged cognitive function sub-items and qi deficiency score,and the correlation coefficient was 0.135(P0.01).Conclusion:The syndrome factors of take deficiency as root cause and blood stasis,phlegm camee as symptoms cause and evolved with the progress of the.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZhonghua zhongyiyao zazhiSame topicTraditional Chinese Medicine StudiesFrench-language works237,207