Evaluation effect of auditory event related potential P300 on cognitive function of the community elderly people
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective The research aimed to analyze the differences of auditory event related potential P300 in elderly people with different levels of cognitive function in order to provide the basis for confirming the cognitive level in community. Methods Thirty-two patients with Alzheimer disease (AD group) , thirty-five MCI patients (MCI group) and thirty-five normal people (normal group) were selected from five communities in Weifang from October 2011 to October 2013. The cognitive level of these subjects was evaluated with Mini Mental State Examination(MMSE) and the event related potential P300 of these patients were recorded with a passive auditory oddball paradigm using the ESI -64 system(Neuroscan Inc., USA) which was used for collecting and recording EEG signals. Results The latencies of MCI group showed significantly prolonged values [(378.17±24.62) ms, P<0.01], and lower amplitudes [(12.35±4.02) μV, P<0.05] of the P300 compared with normal control [(15.59±5.99)μV,P<0.05]. The latencies of AD group showed significantly prolonged values [(425.43±32.11) ms, P<0.01)], and lower amplitudes [(8.56±5.21) μV, P<0.01] of the P300 compared with normal group and MCI group. Conclusions The prolonged latency and lower amplitude of auditory event related potential P300 measurement contribute to diagnose the degree of cognitive dysfunction in the elderly. It holds important value for noninvasive diagnosis and evaluation of cognitive dysfunction among the elderly in community. Key words: Aged; Alzheimer disease; Cognition disorder; Auditory perception; Event related potentials; P300; Community
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".