Blood pressure levels and prognosis of intracranial trauma patients with cognitive dysfunction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of blood pressure levels on prognosis of intracranial trauma patients with cognitive dysfunction. METHODS: One hundred and twenty intracranial trauma patients enrolled in our hospital from February 2011 to July 2013 were selected, including 40 hypertension and 80 non-hypertension cases. They were investigated by MiniMental State Examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scales, and the clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: Compared with the control group, the MoCA, visuospatial executive function, attention, language, delayed recall, MMSE, orientation and memory scores of the hypertension group were significantly lower. Unconditional Logistic regression analysis showed that age, history of cerebrovascular disease and triglyceride level were the independent risk factors of cognitive function. CONCLUSION: The blood pressure levels of intracranial trauma patients were associated with cognitive function, with age, history of cerebrovascular disease and triglyceride level as the independent risk factors. Therefore, it is necessary to control blood pressure level to improve prognosis.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".