MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparison of cognitive functions and behavioral and psychological symptoms in patients with general paresis of insane and Alzheimer’s disease

2014· article· en· W3029218416 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xinru Chen, Yuping Ning, Haishan Shi, Le Hou, Zheng Dong, Yan Tan, Xiaomei Zhong

Bibliographic record

VenueChin J Neurol · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical Dementia RatingDementiaMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitionRating scaleDiseaseInternal medicineMedicineAlzheimer's diseasePsychologyPsychiatryClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To compare the cognitive impairment and behavioral and psychological symptoms between patients with general paresis of insane (GPI) and those with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Methods Fifty patients with GPI and sixty-one patients with AD from Guangzhou Brain Hospital were recruited in this case-control study. The severity of dementia was determined by the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR). Cognitive functions and behavioral and psychological symptoms were evaluated by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog) and Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). Results (1) Cognitive assessments: There were statistically significant differences in different groups of patients classified by the CDR both in GPI and AD patients.In addition, with the increasing of the CDR degree, scores of MMSE and MoCA tended to drop down, but the scores of ADAS-cog tended to go up conversely. Comparing GPI with AD, the scores of MMSE in mild GPI groups were significantly higher than mild AD group (GPI: 20.63±5.87, AD: 14.32±5.05, F=7.697, P=0.008), while the scores of ADAS-cog memory factor in mild GPI groups were significantly lower than mild AD group (GPI: 13.66 (8.33), AD: 23.00 (10.50), Z=-3.205, P=0.001). (2) Assessments of behavioral and psychological symptoms: In GPI patients, the scores of NPI were increased with the degree of CDR; On the contrary, the scores stayed consistent relatively in patients with AD. In addition, comparing GPI with AD, patients with moderate degree were prominent in euphoria and eating disorders in GPI, rather than AD. What’s more, severe GPI patients had significantly higher score in hallucination, delusion, depression and the total of NPI than severe AD patients. Conclusion Patients with GPI and AD show different characteristics in behavioral and psychological symptoms, which could help clinicians better understand GPI and AD. Key words: Neurosyphilis; Alzheimer disease; Cognition disorders; Neurobehavioral manifestations; Diagnosis, differential

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)0.000
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.443

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChin J NeurolSame topicPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyFrench-language works237,207