HUBUNGAN FIBRILASI ATRIUM TERHADAP PENURUNAN FUNGSI KOGNITIF
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Latar Belakang: Fibrilasi atrium merupakan aritmia jantung yang paling sering ditemui. Fibrilasi atrium diyakini memiliki korelasi terhadap terjadinya gangguan kognitif namun mekanismenya masih belum diketahui dengan jelas. Salah satu instrumen untuk mengukur fungsi kognitif adalah Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Tujuan: Mengetahui hubungan fibrilasi atrium dengan penurunan fungsi kognitif yang diukur dengan metode Montreal Cognitive Assessment versi Indonesia (MoCA-Ina). Metode: Desain penelitian ini adalah penelitian observasional dengan rancangan cross sectional. Subjek penelitian dari 14 subjek dengan fibrilasi atrium dan 14 subjek dengan irama sinus di Instalasi Elang RSUP Dr.Kariadi Semarang pada bulan April hingga Mei 2016. Kelompok penelitian dilakukan penilaian fungsi kognitif dengan menggunakan Montreal Cognitive Assesment versi Indonesia (MoCA-Ina). Hasil: Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa terdapat penurunan fungsi kognitif pada subjek dengan fibrilasi atrium sebanyak 13 subjek (92,9%) dan subjek dengan irama sinus sebanyak 3 subjek (21,4%). Penelitian ini menunjukkan hubungan yang signifikan antara fibrilasi atrium dengan kejadian penurunan fungsi kognitif (p=0,000). Kesimpulan: Berdasarkan hasil penelitian dapat disimpulkan bahwa terdapat hubungan yang signifikan antara fibrilasi atrium dengan penurunan fungsi kognitif.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".