MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The preliminary research on the characteristics of the cognitive function and the mechanism in frontal bottom laceration patients

2010· article· en· W3029360223 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wei-chuan Dai, Junyan Chen, Hongzhi Gao, Peixuan Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueChin J Neurol · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNerve Injury and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWisconsin Card Sorting TestCognitionFrontal lobeAudiologyMontreal Cognitive AssessmentTrail Making TestPsychologyFluencyMedicineDevelopmental psychologyInternal medicinePsychiatryNeuropsychologyCognitive impairment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To investigate the possible pathogenesis of the cognitive function in unilateral frontal bottom laceration by follow-up study in patients after one month of the onset. Methods MMSE, Loewenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment (LOTCA), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) scales were used to evaluate neurocognitie function in 42 patients after one month of onset of unilateral frontal bottom laceration and 45 normal controls. The wave amplitude and the latency of the endogenous composition N2, P3 of P300 were measured at the cognitive potential instrument. Level of AChE was determined by ELISA and active AChE was analyzed by the ration analyses. Stepwise multivariate regression analyzed the correlation of the overall cognitive function and the lever and active of AChE. Results The cognitive test scores in patients were significantly worse than those in normal controls. The ability of recite sentences, fluency of words, reading, understanding language,cognitive transfering decreases in the left frontal bottom laceration patients (Group A, 23 cases), while the ability of attention, action, organization, graphics depicting, abstract epitoming, logical thinking were all seriously impaired in the patients with right frontal bottom laceration (Group B, 19 cases). The latency of the endogenous composition N2, P3 in patients ( Group A: (322. 4 ± 17.0), (410. 1 ± 19.9) ms; Group B:( 308.4 ± 15.6), (385.5 ± 17.4) ms) is more lengthen ( F = 4. 084, P = 0. 018; F = 3.467, P = 0. 038 )than the normal controls ( (268.6 ± 14. 7 ), ( 369. 2 ± 15. 4 ) ms) and the wave amplitude is lower ( F =2. 986 ,P =0. 047 ;F =3. 313 ,P =0. 041 ). The latency of N2 ,P3 in Group A of is more lengthen than Group B, while the wave amplitude is higher. The difference of the active of AChE in patients and control groups had no statistical significance, however, the level of AChE in two groups had statistical significance. The comparison of the active and the total AChE in patients has also not statistical significance. The correlation of the overall cognitive function has the linear regression with the parts of the brain and the level of AChE ( rY1.2 = 0. 584, P = 0. 039; rY2.1 = 0. 726, P = 0. 017 ). The standardized regression coefficients showed the level of AChE has the biggest influence to the overall cognitive function ( |Beta| =0. 3601, rY2.1 =0. 726).Conclusions AChE may be one of the important factors in the cognitive function after frontal bottom laceration. The specific damages of cognitive function in unilateral frontal bottom laceration patients closely relate with the lesion locations in the injured frontal bottom laceration. Key words: Brain injuries;  Cognition disorders;  Event-related potentials, P300; Cholinesterases

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChin J NeurolSame topicNerve Injury and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207