Impact of Personalized Intervention with Family's Participation on the Security of Intravenous Infusions in Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To explore the effect of personalized intervention with family's participation on the security of intravenous infusions in patients with mild cognitive impairment(MCI). Methods 39 cases of MCI patients with intravenous infusions in our hospital from September 2013 to December 2013 were selected as the control group, while 40 cases of MCI patients from January 2014 to April 2014 were selected as the observation group. All patients received same nursing intervention; in addition, patients in the observation group had family's participation during the nursing intervention process. The scores of Montreal cognitive assessment(MoCA), incidence of safety issues during intravenous infusion and satisfaction to intravenous infusion were compared between two groups. Results The observation group was superior to the control group in the scores of MoCA, incidence of safety issues during intravenous infusion and satisfaction to intravenous infusion(P 0.05). Conclusions Personalized intervention with family's participation can effectively improve MCI patients' cognitive function, reduce the incidence of safety issues during intravenous infusion, and improve patients' satisfaction to intravenous infusion.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".