MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901561032

KOGNITIVNA DISFUNKCIJA U BOLESNIKA S PARKINSONOVOM BOLESTI U SPLITSKO-DALMATINSKOJ ŽUPANIJI

2018· dissertation· sh· W2901561032 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katarina Tomasović

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languagesh
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitionMedicineAffect (linguistics)DementiaMann–Whitney U testCognitive impairmentDiseasePsychologyGerontologyClinical psychologyPhysical therapyPsychiatryInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: The aim of this study was to review the prevalence of cognitive impairment in patients with Parkinson′s disease (PD) in Split-Dalmatia County, to investigate effects of other variables on the cognitive status and its impact on the patients’ quality of life. Subjects and methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted at the Department of Neurology. The study included 39 patients suffering from PD. The data was collected in the period from October 2017, ending in May 2018. We started the examination with an insight into the medical documentation where the demographic and medical information about our subjects were collected. Subjects were than examined and asked to fill out PD specific questionnaires: MoCA, Hoeh and Yahr scale, UPDRS, PDQ-39, daily activity scales by Schwab and England. In order to analyze the given variables we used Mann-Whitney U test, Shapiro-Wilk test, and the Pearson coefficient of correlation. Results: Most of the patients who participated in the research scored less than 26 points on the MoCA questionnaire, which indicates a mild cognitive impairment and/or dementia. There hasn’t been found a statistically significant difference among men and women in the results of the MoCA questionnaire. Age has proven to be a risk factor for the development of cognitive dysfunctions. The duration of the disease did not affect the cognition test results. The MoCA questionnaire domains of visuospatial/executive abilities, attention, language, abstract thinking, and delayed recall showed statistically significant difference in outcome between patients with cognitive impairment (MoCA<26) and with normal cognition. A connection was established between results of the MoCA questionnaire and the stage of disease by Hoehn and Yahr. Patients in the severe stage of disease achieved the worst results. A correlation was also established between the MoCA questionnaire results and the UPDRS scale that tracks the development of the disease symptoms. As a result of the progression of motor symptoms of the disease and a consequently higher average of the use of levodopa, the cognitive ability of patients with PD is in decline. A correlation was also found between the quality of life and cognitive assessment tests. Individuals with a better quality of life performed better results on cognitive assessment tests. Conclusions: Cognitive dysfunction in the range of mild cognitive impairment to dementia is common symptom of PD patients. A common symptoms in PD patients are cognitive deficit, specifically in the domains of the visuospatial/executive abilities, attention, language, abstract thinking and delayed recall. The age of patient during the diagnosis of the disease and at the time of the survey has a negative impact on cognitive abilities, whereas sex and length of the disease do not affect cognitive abilities. Patients in the severe stage of disease achieved the worst results on the MoCA questionnaire. Cognitive functions affect the patient’s quality of life to a great extent.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeurological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207