Subjective and objective cognition 6-week post-coronary artery bypass graft surgery: A descriptive pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery has been found to be associated with post-operative cognitive decline. Despite the large and growing numbers being conducted in South Africa, the associated or ensuing cognitive symptoms or impairment have received little research attention. AIM: The aim of this pilot study was to describe the nature and extent of subjective cognitive complaints (SCCs) and objective cognitive impairments in patients 6-week post-CABG surgery in a clinical sample in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) Province, South Africa. SETTING: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among outpatients attending their 6-week post-CABG surgical review at a cardiology clinic in a KZN provincial hospital. METHOD: Socio-demographic and clinical data were captured, with SCCs being determined by using standardised questions; cognition was assessed with the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA). RESULTS: = 9; 35.71%) reported at least one new SCC; their mean age was 55.36 years which was lower than those without subjective complaints (59.81). CONCLUSIONS: Subjective and objective cognitive impairments were evident in patients 6-week post-CABG surgery identifying a need for longitudinal cognitive screening both pre- and post- operatively in patients undergoing CABG surgery.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".