Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives：Rapid eye movement(REM) sleep behavior disorder(RBD) is a parasomnia characterized by loss of normal atonia during REM sleep and dream enacting behavior(DEB) including vocalizations, striking behaviors or violent movements. A proportion of RBD patients had showed mild cognitive decline, but it is controversial. This study has an aim to compare neurocognitive functions between idiopathic RBD(iRBD) and normal subjects in the Korean elderly. Methods：Twenty-six iRBD subjects and 25 normal controls were selected by polysomnography, brain magnetic resonance imaging and clinical interview with psychiatrist. All the subjects completed the Korean version of the consortium to establish a registry for Alzheimer’s disease neuropsychological battery(CERAD-KN) as an objective cognitive measure and subjective memory complaints questionnaire(SMCQ). Additionally Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI) for sleep quality, the Epworth sleepiness scale(ESS) for daytime sleepiness and the Korean version of the geriatric depression scale(GDS) for depressive symptoms were done. Results：iRBD subjects showed poorer sleep quality with PSQI than normal controls, but there were no differences in other sleep parameters between groups. In the neurocognitive function test, iRBD subjects showed higher SMCQ score and lower score of Digit span backward test than normal controls. Conclusion：In the elderly, subjects with iRBD had subjective memory complaints and impaired attention function, but not other objective cognitive measures. As attention function as well as subjective memory complaints might an indicator for cognitive disorders, iRBD patients with mild cognitive decline needs to be adequately controlled.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.007 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".