MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2615387318 · doi:10.1042/cs20160607

Clinical presentations and epidemiology of vascular dementia

2017· review· en· W2615387318 on OpenAlexaff
Eric E. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Science · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and genetic disorders
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuropathologyDementiaMedicineStroke (engine)Vascular dementiaDiseasePopulationEtiologyIntensive care medicineCardiologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cerebrovascular and cardiovascular diseases cause vascular brain injury that can lead to vascular cognitive impairment (VCI). VCI is the second most common neuropathology of dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), accounting for up to one-third of the population risk. It is frequently present along with other age-related pathologies such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). Multiple etiology dementia with both VCI and AD is the single most common cause of later life dementia. There are two main clinical syndromes of VCI: post-stroke VCI in which cognitive impairment is the immediate consequence of a recent stroke and VCI without recent stroke in which cognitive impairment is the result of covert vascular brain injury detected only on neuroimaging or neuropathology. VCI is a syndrome that can result from any cause of infarction, hemorrhage, large artery disease, cardioembolism, small vessel disease, or other cerebrovascular or cardiovascular diseases. Secondary prevention of further vascular brain injury may improve outcomes in VCI.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.423
GPT teacher head0.600
Teacher spread0.177 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations251
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical ScienceSame topicCerebrovascular and genetic disordersFrench-language works237,207