Comparative study of underwent carotid stent implantation and drug therapy in patients with cerebral infarction combined cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To study the influence of cognitive impairment of underwent carotid stent implantation in patients with cerebral infarction combined cognitive impairment. Methods Of the 80 patients with cerebral infarction combined cognitive impairment, based on the routine treatment, 45 patients with indication in stent group were treated with underwent carotid stent transluminal angioplasty, and the other 35 patients in drug group were treated with drug therapy. To observe the changes of cognitive function by mini mental state examination(MMSE), Montreal cognitive function scale(Mo CA), daily living measuring scale(Barthel index) before treatment and treatment after 1, 3, 6 months. Results The MMSE, Mo CA score, and Barthel index in drug group after treatment 6 months and in stent group after operation 1, 3, 6 months were obviously increased compared with before treatment, the differences was statistically significant(P 0.05), and which in stent group was obviously increased compared with which in drug group, the differences was statistically significant(P 0.05). Conclusion Underwent carotid stent implantation could improve the cognitive impairment in patients with cerebral infarction combined cognitive impairment.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".