Effects of hyperbaric oxygen on the neural function and cognitive function in patients with acute cerebral infarction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To explore the changes of neural function and cognitive function in patients with acute cerebral infarction before and after hyperbaric oxygen (HBO) therapy,and also to evaluate the clinical effect of HBO on patients with acute cerebral infarction.Methods With the knowledge and consent of the patients and following the signing of the letter of agreement,92 cases of acute cerebral infarction were divided into two groups:the HBO group and the control group.Before treatment and (10 ± 2)days and (90 ± 3)days after treatment,scores of neural function for the patients of both groups were assessed by using the National Institute of Health Stroke Survey(NIHSS) and Barthel Index(BI) to evaluate their neural function and daily life activity.Before treatment and on day (10 ± 2)after treatment,MoCA scale assessment was performed to evaluate the cognitive function of the patients in the 2 groups.Results At d 10 after treatment,no statistical significance could be noticed in the scores of NIHSS and BI for the patients of the 2 groups (P ＞ 0.05).However,at d 90,scores of NIHSS for the patients of the HBO group decreased,while BI scores elevated,and statistical differences could be noted when comparisons were made between the 2 groups(P ＜ 0.05).After 10 days of HBO therapy,the scores of visual-space,concentration,speech,orientation and total scores of MoCA in the patients of the HBO group increased obviously,when they were compared with those of the control group and statistical significance could be noted between them (P ＜ 0.05).Conclusions HBO therapy was beneficial to patients with acute cerebral infarction.The short-term effect of HBO therapy was that it could improve cognitive function,and its long-term effect was to improve their neural function and daily life activity. Key words: Hyperbaric oxygen; Acute cerebral infarction; Neural function; Cognitive function
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 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".