Audiological predictors of postoperative cognitive dysfunction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of the work is to assess the efficacy of the methods of audiological evaluation of the functional state of the central departments of the auditory system in diagnostics of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD). The authors examined 15 patients with generalized atherosclerosis after reconstructive surgery on the lower extremity vessels (the main group) and 10 patients of general surgical profile without the signs of generalized atherosclerosis (the control group). Audiological examination included tonal threshold audiometry, Russian matrix sentence test in noise and dichotic digit test. For POCD diagnostics the authors used the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). The studies were performed before and after surgery. A postoperative decrease by 1 or more MoCA points compared to the initial value was considered as a POCD sign. Initially low cognitive background is established to be one of the main risk factors for the POCD development. The article presents the possibility to diagnose the cognitive disorders by means of audiological tests. The presence of signs of central auditory processing disorders can be regarded as a POCD predictor.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".