A study on risk factors for mild vascular cognitive impairment in patients with lacunar infarct
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To study the risk factors for vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) after lacunar infarct (LACI). Methods A total of 138 patients with LACI were evaluated by Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and divided into normal cognitive function group (normal, N = 55), mild cognitive impairment (MCI) group (mild, N = 73) and severe cognitive impairment group (severe, N = 10). Univariate and backward multivariate Logistic regression analysis were used to screen the risk factors for VCI after LACI. Results Logistic regression analysis showed that infarct in critical site (OR = 1.179, 95% CI: 0.870-2.472; P = 0.012) and white matter hyperintensity (WMH) Grade 3-4 (OR = 2.005, 95% CI: 0.910-4.502; P = 0.024) were independent risk factors for VCI in patients with LACI. Conclusions VCI in patients with LACI is related to multiple factors, in which infarct in critical site and WMH Grade 3-4 are independent risk factors. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-6731.2016.11.010
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".