MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788362712 · doi:10.1159/000485961

Cognitive Function Declines Significantly during Haemodialysis in a Majority of Patients: A Call for Further Research

2018· article· en· W2788362712 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Indranil Dasgupta, Mitesh Patel, Nuredin Mohammed, Jyoti Baharani, Thejasvi Subramanian, G. Neil Thomas, George Tadros

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood Purification · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCognitionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentDialysisCognitive declineConfoundingDementiaInternal medicineDiseasePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Cognitive impairment (CI) is very common condition that occurs in haemodialysis patients and it is associated with reduced functional capacity and mortality. We assessed the change in cognitive function during haemodialysis and associated risk factors. METHODS: All patients ≥50 years, on haemodialysis for ≥3 months, no dementia from 2 dialysis centres were selected. Cognition was assessed before and after a haemodialysis session using parallel versions of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) tool. Multiple regression was used to examine potential confounders. RESULTS: Eight-two patients completed both tests - median age 73 (52-91) years, 59% male, dialysis vintage 41 (3-88) months. Sixty-two (76%) had CI at baseline. Cognition declined over dialysis (MOCA 21 ± 4.8 to 19.1 ± 4.1, p < 0.001) and domains affected were attention, language, abstraction and delayed recall. Age and dialysis vintage were independently associated with decline. CONCLUSION: Cognitive function declines over a haemodialysis session and this has significant clinical implications over health literacy, self-management and tasks like driving. More research is needed to find the cause for this decline in cognition.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.337
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

Citations33
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood PurificationSame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207