MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984526678 · doi:10.29144/kscte.2019.11.1.15

A Study on the Correlation Between Cognitive Function and Korean Version of Modified Bathel Index Evaluation of Stroke Patients

2019· article· en· W2984526678 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yujeong Kim, Bora Kang, Mi-Jin Ahn, Jeong-Weon Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Korean Society of Cognitive Therapeutic Exercise · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiverse Approaches in Healthcare and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrelationStroke (engine)Barthel indexCognitionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentRehabilitationPsychologyInclusion and exclusion criteriaNeglectPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineGerontologyCognitive impairmentPsychiatryAlternative medicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aims to propose the relationships between the MMSE-K, MoCA-K, LICA, and K-MBI of stroke patients older than 60 and analyze the influence between each factor to investigate the effectiveness of those measures as clinical assessment tools for stroke patients. The research recruited sixteen participants who are hospitalized stroke patients aged over 60 from Y rehabilitation hospital located in Goyang city. As the inclusion crietra, first, the participant must have been diagnosed as the stroke for over six months. Second, the participant required to be able to communicate. Third, the participant had to be older than 60. Fourth, the participant had to be free from the hemi-neglect; fifth, the participant had to understand the purpose of the research and agreed upon participating it. The MoCA-K and K-MBI showed weak correlation with r=.560, and the LICA and K-MBI showed weak correlation with r=.463. However, MMSE-K and K-MBI did not show any correlation. The significance of this research is that it proposed the basis for an active utilization and effectiveness of MMSE-K, MoCA-K, LICA, and K-MBI as the clinical assessment tool for an accurate cognitive level selection and fast comeback to the society through investigating the correlations between the measures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.108
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Korean Society of Cognitive Therapeutic ExerciseSame topicDiverse Approaches in Healthcare and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207