Symptoms and consequences of subarachnoid haemorrhage after 7 years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Short-term follow-up studies after a subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) have shown impaired cognition, fatigue, depression and anxiety, but less is known regarding long-term consequences. The aim of this study was to investigate health outcomes in persons 7 years after SAH. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a descriptive cohort follow-up study of persons with non-traumatic SAH treated at Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden. The follow-up was conducted 7 years post-treatment and included home visits using forms and questionnaires about health outcomes; the Barthel Index (BI), modified Rankin Scale (mRS), National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI). RESULTS: Seven years post-SAH, 33 persons fulfilled the inclusion criteria, of whom 18 (55%) participated (median age 63 years). Cognitive impairment was present in 11 participants, assessed with the MoCA, where the item of delayed recall was most difficult. The majority (n = 16) were independent in activities of daily living (ADL), and few (n = 3) had physical symptoms according to the NIHSS. However, three participants were free from disability according to the mRS. Nearly, half of the participants had symptoms of anxiety (n = 8). Three had symptoms of depression and more than half experienced fatigue. CONCLUSION: The physical function and independency in ADL is high among long-term SAH survivors. Despite this, only a few were completely free from disability, and the main problems 7 years after SAH were cognitive impairment and anxiety.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".