Cognitive assessment of patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate cognitive performance for the first time in participants with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: In total, 70 participants with NAFLD and 73 age-matched and sex-matched healthy participants were enrolled in this prospective cross-sectional study. The diagnosis of NAFLD was made on the basis of abdominal ultrasonography findings. Anthropometric indices were calculated, and routine laboratory analyses were carried out for each participant. All participants provided sociodemographic data and completed the Beck Depression Inventory-II. Cognitive functions were evaluated using the Turkish version of the MoCA, with a cut-off score for mild cognitive impairment of less than 21 points. RESULTS: The MoCA scores were significantly lower in participants with NAFLD than in the healthy group (P<0.05). In addition, more NAFLD participants than healthy participants presented with deficits in the visuospatial (P<0.05) and executive function domains (P<0.05). In the multivariate model, education level [2.79 (1.12-6.96); P<0.05] and area of residence [5.68 (2.24-14.38); P<0.001] were associated independently with cognitive dysfunction in both the NAFLD and the healthy groups. The MoCA scores were correlated negatively with fibrosis 4 scores in NAFLD participants (r=-0.359; P<0.05). However, hepatosteatosis grade and the presence of metabolic syndrome were not correlated with MoCA scores in the NAFLD group (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: Our results show that NAFLD patients may have early or subtle cognitive dysfunction, including in the visuospatial and executive function domains, as indexed by scores on the MoCA test. Further targeted psychometric testing will be required to confirm the presence of cognitive impairment in this population.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".