A newly designed intensive caregiver education program reduces cognitive impairment, anxiety, and depression in patients with acute ischemic stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a newly designed intensive caregiver education program (ICEP) on reducing cognitive impairment, anxiety, and depression in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients. One hundred and ninety-six AIS patients were divided into ICEP group and Control group in a 1:1 ratio using blocked randomization method. In the ICEP group, the caregivers received ICEP, while in the Control group caregivers received usual education and guidance. All patients received conventional rehabilitation treatment. Cognitive impairment (assessed by Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) score and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score), anxiety (assessed by Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)-A score and Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) score), and depression (assessed by HADS-D score and Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) score) were assessed at baseline (M0), 3 months (M3), 6 months (M6), and 12 months (M12). Cognitive impairment score at M12 and cognitive impairment score change (M12-M0) were increased, while cognitive impairment rate at M12 was reduced in the ICEP group compared with the Control group. Anxiety score change (M12-M0), anxiety score at M12, and anxiety rate at M12 were decreased in the ICEP group compared with the Control group. Depression score change (M12-M0), depression score at M12, and depression rate at M12 were lower in the ICEP group compared with the Control group. Further subgroup analysis based on baseline features also provided similar results. In conclusion, ICEP effectively reduced cognitive impairment, anxiety, and depression in AIS 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".