The relationship between cognitive function and arterial partial pressure O2 in patients with COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The high incidence of cognition disorders in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients represents a main focus in public health field recently. Thus, we tried to explore relationship between cognitive function and arterial partial pressure O2 (PaO2) in patients with COPD as assessed by Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE) and/or Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medical and scientific literature databases, such as Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Database, were searched independently by 2 reviewers until February 2016. Correlation coefficient (r or rs) values were obtained from each study, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using STATA12.0 software. RESULTS: A total of 2049 studies were produced, and 9 of which were analyzed (714 participants) in the meta-analysis. The pooled r observed medium relationship for all selected studies (r = 0.405, 95% CI 0.31-0.55), and notable heterogeneity was also tested between studies (χ = 17.72, P = .023; I = 54.9%). After the sensitivity and subgroup analysis, the heterogeneity significantly decreased. Subgroup analysis showed that MMSE score was stronger correlation between PaO2 and cognitive function than MoCA score in the COPD patients. Begg test did not indicate potential risk of publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: There was a negative correlation between cognitive function and anoxia in patients with COPD, so it may be extremely essential to predict and improve the status of hypoxia in COPD patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".