Neuropsychological Function in Patients With Acute Tetraplegia and Sleep Disordered Breathing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Sleep disordered breathing is highly prevalent following spinal cord injury and likely caused by the injury. Beyond the devastating physical consequences of spinal cord injury, neuropsychological dysfunction is also common. In both the able-bodied and chronic spinal cord injury patients, sleep disordered breathing impairs many areas of neuropsychological function. However, this has not been investigated in patients with acute injury. Study objectives: To investigate the relationship between apnea severity and neuropsychological function in patients with acute-onset tetraplegia and sleep disordered breathing. Methods: Polysomnography and neuropsychological testing were performed on 104 participants (age M = 45.60, SD = 16.38; 10 female) across 11 international sites, 2 months postinjury (M = 60.70 days, SD = 39.48). Neuropsychological tests assessed attention, information processing, executive function, memory, learning, mood, and quality of life. Results: More severe sleep apnea was associated with poorer attention, information processing, and immediate recall. Deficits did not extend to memory. Higher preinjury intelligence and being younger reduced the associations with sleep disordered breathing; however, these protective factors were insufficient to counter the damage to attention, immediate recall, and information processing associated with sleep disordered breathing. Conclusions: These data suggest that new spinal cord injury may function as a model of “acute sleep apnea” and that more widespread sleep apnea–related deficits, including memory, may only be seen with longer exposure to apnea. These findings have important implications for functioning and skill acquisition during rehabilitation and, as such, highlight the importance of sleep health following tetraplegia.
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".