COPD patients hospitalized with exacerbations have greater cognitive impairment than patients hospitalized with decompensated heart failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: People with COPD have cognitive dysfunction, which is greater in those hospitalized for exacerbations than in stable outpatients. We tested the hypothesis that cognitive dysfunction at exacerbation is a disease-specific feature of COPD, rather than a nonspecific feature of hospitalization for acute illness, by comparing cognition between patients hospitalized for acute COPD exacerbations and those with worsening heart failure (HF). Patients and methods: A total of 40 hospital inpatients were recruited, 20 patients with COPD exacerbations and 20 patients with congestive or left-sided HF. Exclusion criteria included previous stroke, known neurological disease, and marked alcohol excess. Participants completed the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and underwent spirometry and review of clinical records. Results: Age (mean±SD, COPD 73±10; HF 76±11 years), acute illness severity (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation [APACHE]-II, COPD 15.4±3.5; HF 15.9±3.0), comorbidities (Charlson index, COPD 1.3±1.9; HF 1.6±1.5), and educational background were similar between COPD and HF groups. MoCA total was significantly lower in COPD than in HF (COPD 20.6±5.6; HF 24.8±3.5, P =0.007); however, significance was lost after correction for age, sex, and pack year smoking history. When compared with HF patients, the COPD cohort performed worse on the following domains of the MoCA: visuospatial function (median [IQR], COPD 0 [1]; HF 2 [1], P =0.003), executive function (COPD 2 [1]; HF 3 [1], P =0.035), and attention (COPD 4 [3]; HF 6 [2], P =0.020). Age ( P =0.012) and random glucose concentration ( P =0.041) were associated with cognitive function in whole group analysis, with pack year smoking history reaching borderline significance ( P =0.050). Conclusion: Total MoCA score for COPD and HF indicated that both groups had mild cognitive impairment, although this was greater in people with COPD. Mechanisms underlying the observed cognitive dysfunction in COPD remain unclear but appear related to blood glucose concentrations and greater lifetime smoking load. Keywords: Montreal cognitive assessment, cognition, comorbidities, systemic, smoking, hyperglycemia
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".