The Impact of Cognitive Impairment on Poststroke Outcomes: A 5-Year Follow-Up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To explore the impact of cognitive impairment poststroke on outcomes at 5 years. METHODS: Five-year follow-up of the Action on Secondary Prevention Interventions and Rehabilitation in Stroke (ASPIRE-S) prospective cohort. Two hundred twenty-six ischemic stroke survivors completed Montreal Cognitive Assessments at 6 months poststroke. Outcomes at 5 years included independence in activities of daily living, receipt of informal care, quality of life, and depressive symptoms. Data were analyzed using logistic and linear regression models. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs; 95% confidence interval [CI]) and β coefficients (95% CI) are reported. RESULTS: One hundred one stroke survivors were followed up at 5 years. Cognitive impairment at 6 months was independently associated with worse quality of life (B [95% CI]: -0.595 [-0.943 to -0.248]), lower levels of independence (B [95% CI]: -3.605 [-5.705 to -1.505]), increased likelihood of receiving informal care (OR [95% CI]: 6.41 [1.50-27.32]), and increased likelihood of depressive symptoms (OR [95% CI]: 4.60 [1.22-17.40]). Conclusion: Cognitive impairment poststroke is associated with a range of worse outcomes. More effective interventions are needed to improve outcomes for this vulnerable group of patients.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".