Mapping the contribution and strategic distribution patterns of neuroimaging features of small vessel disease in poststroke cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Individual neuroimaging features of small vessel disease (SVD) have been reported to influence poststroke cognition. This study aimed to investigate the joint contribution and strategic distribution patterns of multiple types of SVD imaging features in poststroke cognitive impairment. METHODS: We studied 145 first-ever ischaemic stroke patients with MRI and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) examined at baseline. The local burdens of acute ischaemic lesion (AIL), white matter hyperintensity, lacune, enlarged perivascular space and cross-sectional atrophy were quantified and entered into support vector regression (SVR) models to associate with the global and domain scores of MoCA. The SVR models were optimised with feature selection through 10-fold cross-validations. The contribution of SVD features to MoCA scores was measured by the prediction accuracy in the corresponding SVR model after optimisation. RESULTS: The combination of the neuroimaging features of SVD contributed much more to the MoCA deficits on top of AILs compared with individual SVD features, and the cognitive impact of different individual SVD features was generally similar. As identified by the optimal SVR models, the important SVD-affected regions were mainly located in the basal ganglia and white matter around it, although the specific regions varied for MoCA and its domains. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple types of SVD neuroimaging features jointly had a significant impact on global and domain cognitive functionings after stroke on top of AILs. The map of strategic cognitive-relevant regions of SVD features may help clinicians to understand their complementary impact on poststroke 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 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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".