P4626Cognitive function correlates with CHA2DS2-VASc score in patients with atrial fibrillation: The Swiss atrial fibrillation cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: There is emerging evidence suggesting a link between atrial fibrillation (AF) and the development of dementia, but only little is known about cardiovascular predictors and their relation to functional cognitive decline in patients with AF. The Swiss AF Cohort Study (Swiss-AF) is designed to prospectively assess neurocognitive function in a large cohort of unselected AF patients. Methods: Swiss-AF is a prospective ongoing multicenter observational cohort study with a target enrollment of 2'400 patients across 13 sites in Switzerland. All patients undergo clinical and standardized neurocognitive assessment including the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) at baseline and repeatedly yearly thereafter. Results: In this cross-sectional analysis, a total of 1'978 participants completed MoCA assessment at baseline. Abnormal MoCA scores (normal ≥26/30) were found in 46.4% (p<0.001) of the patients. Compared to normal MoCA score, patients with an abnormal MoCA score were older, had a higher median CHA2DS2-VASc score and received more frequently vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and antiplatelet therapy, but less frequently non-vitamin K antagonists (NOAC) for oral anticoagulation (OAC) as shown in the table.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".