Neuropsychological Characteristics in the Patients with Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the different patterns of cognitive impairment in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment(amci),vascular cognitive impairment-no dementia(VCI-ND) and normal elder people.Methods A total of 23 patients with aMCI and 27 patients with VCI-ND(CDR=0.5) and another 40 healthy elder people(CDR=0) were selected.Each individual underwent the neuropsychological tests,including mini mental state examination(MMSE),auditory verbal learning test(AVLT),clock drawing test(CDT),clinical dementia rating scales(CDR) and hamilton rating scale for depression(HAMD).The differences between the three groups were analyzed.Results The differences in age,sexes,and the education background among the three groups were not significant(P0.05) which meant comparability.The mean scores of MMSE,CDT,instant memory and delayed awareness in aMCI and VIC-ND group were much lower than that in the control group(P0.05).The differences in all the test items except for delayed awareness between aMCI group and VCI-ND groups were not significant(P0.05).However,in the recall recognition test,these three groups had significant differences: the score in patients with aMCI(6.65±4.00) was much lower than that in patients with VCI-ND(8.67±2.76;P0.05),and the scores of the two groups were both lower than that in the normal aging group(12.83±1.77;P0.05).Conclusions Compared with normal elder people,the cognition of aMCI and VCI-ND patients is impaired severely.The memory tests suggeste that compared with aMCI patients,VCI-ND patients may have different neuropathological changes leading to different mechanism of memory encoding and retrieval.
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".