Cognitive complaints and cognitive impairment in patients with chronic daily headache
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comorbidities in chronic daily headache (CDH) include emotional disorders (depression, anxiety), insomnia, and musculoskeletal pain at other sites. In CDH, the most common type is a subjective (according to patients themselves) and/or objective (based on the results of cognitive tests) reduction in cognitive functions, which can be caused by emotional disorders, insomnia and/or brain diseases, and a negative effect of chronic pain on cognitive functions. Objective : to analyze cognitive complaints and their changes in patients with CDH. Patients and methods. Subjective complaints and cognitive functions were evaluated in 90 patients (76 women and 14 men) aged 23 to 78 years (mean age, 46.7±12.0 years) with primary forms of CDH according to the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MCA) for 12 months. The majority (68.9%) of patients with CHD complained of diminished memory; however, its mild disorders (25– 26 MCA scores) were found in only a small proportion (23.3%). All patients with subjective diminished memory were ascertained to have neurotic disorders (depression, anxiety disorder) and/or insomnia or a concurrence of mental disorder and insomnia. Results and discussion. All the patients received treatment options, including optimal pharmacotherapy for headache and concomitant diseases, an educational conversation, cognitive- behavioral therapy, and therapeutic exercises. In cognitive impairment (CI), cognitive training was used and Ginkgo biloba extract (EGb 761®) prescribed; in sleep disorders, sleep hygiene rules were explained. Therapy declined the mean number of headache days a month from 29.1±2.03 (at baseline) to 9.3±9.35 (at 12-month follow-up) (p=0.002); while the subjective complaints regressed in the majority of patients; mild MCA changes persisted only in 6.7% of the patients. Management tactics for CHD patients having mild CI and cardiovascular risk factors and the use of EGb 761® to improve cognitive functions were considered. Conclusion. It has been ascertained that in many cases, CI is associated with emotional disorders and insomnia, as well as with pathophysiological mechanisms of chronic pain itself; CI in some patients has a vascular origin. The use of combined treatment programs can promptly and effectively reduce the frequency of headache and improve cognitive functions. EGb 761® (Tanakan®) has a beneficial effect on subjective CI and mild CI.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".