Analysis on the influencing factors of cognitive dysfunction in asymptomatic patients with cerebral infarction and nursing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To analyze the influencing factors of cognitive dysfunction in asymptomatic patients with cerebral infarction.Targeted the health education and psychological care were done.Methods Among 3860 cases of healthy check-up from from June 2010 to December 2011,126 cases with positive results who were divided into observation group,another 126 healthy check up person were divided into control group.The Montreal cognitive assessment scale was used to assess the cognitive function.The patients with positive results were treated with nursing intervention.Results In the observation group blood pressure,blood sugar and blood fat were all higher than those in the control group,there was statistical significance P ＜ 0.05.Cognitive total score,concentration,depending on the space/executive function,abstract thought and so on in the observation group significantly lower than those in the control group,the difference was significantly (P ＜ 0.05).Conclusions Asymptomatic patients with cerebral infarction have cognitive dysfunction,mainly Visual space/executive function,attention and concentration,the abstract thinking and directional force. Key words: Asymptomatic cerebral infarction; Cognitive dysfunction; Multiple-factor analysis; Nursing
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".