PERBEDAAN STATUS KOGNITIF BERDASARKAN MONTREAL COGNITIVE ASSESSMENT PADA PASIEN PASCA STROKE ISKEMIK DAN STROKE HEMORAGIK DI RSUD DR. ZAINOEL ABIDIN BANDA ACEH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRAKStroke merupakan salah satu gangguan serebrovaskular yang dapat diklasifikasikan menjadi stroke iskemik dan stroke hemoragik. Stroke dapat menyebabkan komplikasi kelainan neurologis berupa gangguan motorik maupun sensorik dimana salah satunya adalah gangguan fungsi kognitif. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui apakah terdapat perbedaan status kognitif pada pasien pasca stroke iskemik dan stroke hemoragik. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian analitik observasional dengan desain cross sectional. Teknik pengambilan sampel dilakukan dengan metode consecutive sampling. Status kognitif dinilai dengan menggunakan kuesioner Montreal Cognitive Assessment versi bahasa Indonesia (MoCA-INA). Tempat dilakukannya penelitian adalah di poliklinik saraf, ruang geulima I, instalasi rehabilitasi medik dan instalasi rekam medik RSUD dr. Zainoel Abidin Banda Aceh. Data dianalisis dengan menggunakan independent sample t-test dan Mann Whitney U-test. Didapatkan bahwa seluruh sampel yang berjumlah 66 orang (100%) yang terdiri dari 33 orang (50%) stroke iskemik dan 33 orang (50%) stroke hemoragik mengalami gangguan kognitif. Didapatkan tidak terdapat perbedaan yang bermakna status kognitif pada pasien pasca stroke iskemik dan stroke hemoragik (p = 0,96), baik berdasarkan lokasi lesi hemisfer dextra (p = 0,368), maupun berdasarkan lokasi lesi hemisfer sinistra (p = 0,160). Disimpulkan bahwa terdapat gangguan kognitif pada pasien pasca stroke iskemik dan stroke hemoragik namun tidak terdapat perbedaan status kognitif berdasarkan Montreal Cognitive Assessment pada pasien pasca stroke iskemik dan stroke hemoragik di RSUD dr. Zainoel Abidin Banda Aceh.Kata kunci: stroke iskemik, stroke hemoragik, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA-INA, status kognitif.ABSTRACTStroke is one of cerebrovascular disease that can be classified as ischemic stroke and hemorrhagic stroke. Stroke can cause many complication of neurology disorder like motoric and sensoric disorder, and one of it is cognitive impairment. The purpose of this study was to find out if there was the difference in cognitive status between ischemic stroke and hemorrhagic stroke. This study was and observational analitic in cross sectional design. Sampling technique was consecutive sampling methode. Cognitive status was examined by using a questionnaire of Montreal Cognitive Assessment in Indonesian version (MoCA-INA). The place of this study was in Polyclinic of Neurology, Geulima I unit, Instalation of Medical Rehabilitation, and Instalation of Medical Record RSUD dr. Zainoel Abidin Banda Aceh. Data were analyzed by using independent sample t-test and Mann Whitney U-test. Obtained that the entire of samples which amount to 66 samples (100%), in which 33 ischemic stroke (50%) and 33 hemorrhagic stroke (50%) suffered from cognitive impairment. This study also found that there was no significant difference in cognitive status of ischemic stroke and hemorrhagic stroke (p = 0,96), both in by the location of the lesion in dextra hemisphere (p = 0,368), and by the location of the lesion in sinistra hemisphere (p = 0,160). We can conclude that there was cognitive impairment both in ischemic stroke and hemorrhagic stroke however, there was no difference in cognitive status based on Montreal Cognitive Assessment of patients after ischemic stroke and hemorrhagic stroke in RSUD dr. Zainoel Abidin Banda Aceh.Keywords: ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA-INA, cognitive status.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.003 |
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".