White matter hyperintensity volume predicts persistent cognitive impairment in transient ischemic attack and minor stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Temporary and permanent cognitive changes following transient ischemic attack/minor stroke have been described previously. It is unknown if persisting cognitive deficits in these patients are correlated with acute infarction identified using magnetic resonance imaging. Aims We tested the hypothesis that persistent cognitive impairment after transient ischemic attack/minor stroke can be predicted by the volume of diffusion-weighted imaging lesions. Methods Acute transient ischemic attack/minor stroke (NIH stroke scale score ≤ 3) patients were prospectively recruited within 72 h of onset. Patients underwent Montreal cognitive assessment and magnetic resonance imaging, including diffusion-weighted imaging and Fluid-Attenuated Inverse Recovery sequences, at baseline, days 7 and 30. Cognitive testing was repeated at day 90. Diffusion-weighted imaging lesion and Fluid-Attenuated Inverse Recovery chronic white matter hyperintensity volumes were measured planimetrically. Cognitive impairment was defined a priori as Montreal cognitive assessment score < 26. Results One hundred fifteen patients were imaged at a median (inter-quartile range) of 24.0 (16.6) h after onset. Acute ischemic lesions were present in 91 (79%) patients. Cognitive impairment rates were similar in patients with (47/91, 52%) and without diffusion-weighted imaging lesions (13/24, 54%; p = 0.83). Although linear regression indicated no relationship between acute diffusion-weighted imaging lesion volume and day 30 Montreal cognitive assessment scores (β = -0.163, [-2.243, 0.334], p = 0.144), white matter hyperintensity volumes at baseline were predictive of persistent cognitive deficits after 30 days (β = 2.24, [1.956, 45.369], p = 0.005). Conclusions In most transient ischemic attack/minor stroke patients who suffer acute cognitive impairment post event, deficits are temporary. Deficits after 30 days of onset are correlated with chronic white matter hyperintensity, suggesting subclinical cognitive impairment and/or impaired ability to compensate for the effects of acute ischemic infarcts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".