Melancholia incidence in the convalescence period of cerebral hemorrhage and its correlated factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the melancholia incidence in the convalescence period of cerebral hemorrhage and its correlated factors.Methods Ninety-eight cerebral hemorrhage patients in the convalescence period were involved in this study.Melancholia was assessed by Hamilton depression scale (HAMD),neural functional deficiency was assessed by the national institute of health stroke scale (NIHSS),cognitive function deficiency was assessed by the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) and neural functional deficiency recovery was assessed by modified Rankin scale (mRS).Hemorrhagic site and blood quantity were detected with CT.The blood flow of middle cerebral artery (MCA),anterior cerebral artery (ACA),posterior cerebral artery (PCA) was detected by TCD.Results The melancholia incidence in the convalescence period was 51.0％(50/98),34.0％(17/50) in males and 68.8％(33/48) in females,there was significant difference between the two (P ＜ 0.05 ).The scores of NIHSS and mRS had significantly positive correlation with HAMD (P ＜ 0.05 ),and had significantly negative correlation with MoCA (P ＜ 0.05 ).When the hemorrhagic site was in frontal lobe and blood quantity was 20-40 ml,the melancholia incidence was increased [76.2％ (16/21),62.5％ (25/40)].The average blood velocity of MCA,ACA and PCA in melancholia patients was significantly slower than that without melancholia patients,while resistance index was significantly higher in melancholia patients (P ＜ 0.05).Conclusions Melancholia incidence in the convalescence period of cerebral hemorrhage has positive correlation with sex,NIHSS,MoCA,hemorrhagic site and blood quantity.The average cerebral blood flow in the melancholia patients is significantly slower and resistance index is significantly higher. Key words: Cerebral hemorrhage; Depressive disorder, Risk factor; Cerebral blood flow
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".