MoCA scale for cognitive impairment in patients with cerebral infarction was evaluated in a clinical study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To explore the MoCA scale for cognitive impairment in patients with cerebral infarction to assess the clinical value of. METHODS We applied the Montreal cognitive assessment scale (Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA) of asymptomatic cerebral infarction patients with cognitive dysfunction evaluation, and associated risk factors of analysis. RE- SULTS The study group of patients with MoCA score was significantly lower than that of the control group, and the research group in MCI incidence significantly higher than those in control group, and there was significant difference ( t or χ 2 = 5.61, 18.18, P﹤0.05). Research group of patients with MoCA score was significantly lower than the control group, and the re- search group in MCI incidence significantly higher than those in control group, and there was significant difference (t or χ 2 = 5.61, 18.18, P﹤0.05). Above 65 years of age, multiple cerebral infarction, hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia and oth- er factors in patients with cerebral infarction occurred are a risk factors for cognitive impairment. CONCLUSION MoCA scale, strong operability, simple and fast test, high sensitivity and MoCA can be used as a on cerebral infarction patients with cogni- tive dysfunction assessment and screening of good tools, and it is worth of promoting in clinical applicaiton.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".