COGNITIVE DYSFUNCTIONS IN PATIENTS OF MIDDLE, ELDERLY AND OLD AGE IN THE LONG-TERM PERIOD AFTER CHOLECYSTECTOMY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To study the state of cognitive dysfunction in patients of middle, elderly and old age in the long-term period after cholecystectomy Methods: A study conducted on the state of cognitive dysfunctions in 306 patients with cholelithiasis, operated on at the City Clinical Emergency Hospital for the period 2012 to 2017. Long-term results studied at 12 and 24 months after cholecystectomy. Depending on age, the subjects divided into 3 groups: middle, elderly, and old (senile) age. The study included a standardized neurological examination on a brief scale of neuropsychological testing, «Examination of mental status» and a quantitative assessment of the «Drawing watches» test; cognitive impairment determined by the performance of attention «The arrangement of numbers according to the method of Wexler». In addition, the following tests conducted distribution and switching of attention according to Schulte; selectivity of attention by Munsterberg; Bourdon correction method and intellectual liability assessment Results: 26 (25.4%) middle-aged patients diagnosed with mild cognitive dysfunction. In 28 (27.4%) elderly patients, cognitive impairment characterized by the presence of a moderate degree of cognitive dysfunction. In 39 (38.2%) patients of senile age, cognitive impairment manifested by the inability to memorize new information, as well as to reproduce the information that was already available that however did not lead to social deadaptation. Conclusion: Operative-anesthetic trauma has a negative impact on the state of cognitive functions in elderly and senile patients with a non-burdened neuropsychiatric history in the late postoperative period after cholecystectomy. The prevalence of cognitive impairment in the late postoperative period after cholecystectomy diagnosed in 27.4% of elderly patients and in 38.2% of old patients. The clinical picture of late postoperative cognitive dysfunction in the patients observed and expressed in a decrease in mental performance, attention, memory, distribution and switching of attention, concentration rate and accuracy, and intellectual liability, which was the cause of their social discomfort and reducing the quality of life. Keywords: Age-related cognitive dysfunctions , cholelithiasis, cholecystectomy.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".