Effect of early nursing intervention on cognitive and compliance of cognitive function rehabilitation in patients with lacunar infarction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the effect of early nursing intervention on cognitive and compliance of cognitive function rehabilitation in patients with lacunar infarction.Methods 61 patients with lacunar infarction were chosen and Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) was used to evaluate their cognitive dysfunction.Those who scored less than 26 were randomly divided into the experimental group and the control group.The control group was given conventional cognitive rehabilitation nursing,while the experimental group was given early nursing intervention for 3 months in addition,which included developing individual rehabilitation exercise and finger operation training according to patients' conditions.Two weeks after intervention,cognitive function rehabilitation effect was compared between two groups,and one,two and three months later,two groups'compliance of cognitive function rehabilitation was investigated.Results Before nursing intervention,scores of cognitive function rehabilitation in two groups were (4.8 ±0.68) and (4.8 ±0.54),and there was no statistically significant difference (P ＞ 0.01).Two groups after intervention,score of cognitive function rehabilitation was (15.7 ±2.65) in the experimental group and (11.5 ± 1.87) in the control group,and the difference was statistically significant (t =7.088,P ＜ 0.01).3 months later,patients' compliance of cognitive function rehabilitation in the first,second and third month was all higher in the experimental group than in the control group,and the differences were statistically significant (P ＜ 0.01).Conclusions Early nursing intervention for patients with lacunar infarction can obviously improve their compliance of cognitive function rehabilitation. Key words: Lacunar infarction; Cognitive dysfunction; Early nursing intervention; Compliance
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".