MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2766283112 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2017.06.1233

[P2–574]: DIRECT AND MODERATING EFFECTS OF RECENT LEISURE ACTIVITY PARTICIPATION UPON COGNITIVE FUNCTIONS AFTER STROKE OR TIA

2017· article· en· W2766283112 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stanley Yiu, Kam Tat Leung, Shi Lin, Eugene Lo, Jill Abrigo, Alexander Yuk Lun Lau, Vincent Mok, Adrian Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentStroke (engine)CognitionPsychologyPhysical activityHyperintensityMedicineInternal medicineGerontologyPhysical therapyCognitive impairmentPsychiatryMagnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study is to examine the effects of recent regular participation in physical (PA) and intellectual activities (IA) upon cognition at 3 to 6 months after stroke or TIA. We also explored whether the cognitive effects interacted with the severity of white matter hyperintensities (WMH) in patients with low and high education. Two-hundred and ninety-two subjects with mean age of 66 (11.0) years were recruited at median 161(131–180) days post event. Regular activity participation was determined as ≥3 times/week over the past year before stroke or TIA. Cognitive functions were measured using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to explore the associations between leisure activity participation with WMH and the moderating effects of leisure activities upon relationship between WMH and MoCA (with respective activity x WMH volume interaction). Analyses were further stratified by low (<6 years) or high education (≥6 years). Effect of aerobic and non-aerobic physical activities was also compared. All models were adjusted with age, sex and years of education. PA, but not IA, was negatively related to WMH volume (b=-3.45, p<.05). IA (b=3.81, p<.001) contributed to the MoCA scores. Only IA, but not PA, has main effect towards MoCA score after stroke/TIA (b=3.81, p<.001). Significant interaction with WMH volume was found for PA (b=0.27, p<.01) but not with IA. Such interaction was found in the lower education group (b=.28, p<.01) but not in the higher education group.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery→French-language works237,207→