MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014882400 · doi:10.29342/cnj.v3i1.101

KORELASI ANTARA LOKASI STROKE DENGAN GANGGUAN KOGNITIF PADA PENDERITA STROKE DI RSUP SANGLAH DENPASAR

2020· article· id· W3014882400 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kelvin Yuwanda, Anak Agung Ayu Putri Laksmidewi, Ketut Widyastuti

Bibliographic record

VenueCallosum Neurology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldMedicine
TopicPublic Health and Nutrition
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGynecologyStroke (engine)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Latar Belakang Kasus stroke mengalami kecenderungan peningkatan baik dalam kematian maupun kecacatan. Morbiditas paska stroke dapat berupa masalah fisik, psikis dan kognitif. Risiko gangguan fungsi kognitif meningkat sebesar tiga kali lipat setelah suatu awitan stroke dan 25-50% diantaranya akan berkembang menjadi demensia paska stroke. Penilaian gangguan fungsi kognitif pada penderita paska stroke sangat penting oleh karena gangguan fungsi kognitif berhubungan dengan luaran fungsional yang buruk, tingkat ketergantungan yang tinggi, kualitas hidup yang rendah dan angka kematian yang tinggi. Hubungan lokasi lesi dengan gangguan kognitif pada stroke masih menunjukkan hasil yang berbeda. Metode Penelitian potong lintang pada penderita paska stroke yang dirawat di bangsal rawat inap dan poliklinik saraf RSUP Sanglah Denpasar mulai Oktober 2018 sampai Desember 2018 dengan menggunakan Montreal Cognitive Assessment Indonesian Version (MoCA-Ina). Hasil Responden yang mengikuti sebanyak 80 orang, didapatkan hasil gangguan kognitif pada 43 responden (53,8%), sedangkan sebanyak 37 responden (46,3%) tidak mengalami gangguan kognitif. Simpulan Uji korelasi koefisien kontingensi digunakan, didapatkan hasil analisis uji korelasi didapatkan bahwa lokasi stroke dan fungsi kognitif memiliki korelasi positif dengan kekuatan korelasi yang sedang (r=0,544) dan bermakna secara signifikan (p<0,001). Kata kunci: lokasi stroke, gangguan kognitif, MoCa-Ina

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.006

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.272
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCallosum NeurologySame topicPublic Health and NutritionFrench-language works237,207