Comparison of visual evoked potential changes in patients with alzheimer, vascular dementia and minimal cognitive Impairment with healthy people: a case-control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Alzheimer dementia as the most common cause of dementia is a chronic, progressive, irreversible and incurable disease. The second most common cause of dementia after Alzheimer is vascular dementia. One of the systems involved in dementia is the visuospatial system and visual evoked potential (VEP) can be one of the diagnostic methods for this disease. Therefore, the present study aims to compare visual evoked potential changes in Alzheimer dementia, vascular dementia and patients with minimally conscious impairment (MCI) with healthy people. Methods: A case-control study was performed on referred clients to Shariati Hospital, Tehran, Iran, from April 2015 to September 2016. Patients with cognitive impairment went through Montreal cognitive assessment (MOCA) test and divided into three groups of Alzheimer dementia, vascular dementia and patients with minimally conscious impairment. Subjects with normal cognition were included in the control group. The visual evoked potential test was performed on all participants in two Methods: pattern shift visual evoked potential (Ps-VEP) and flash visual evoked potential (f-VEP) and results were compared between groups. Results: Forty patients were studied in four groups (three patient groups and one control group). 70 percent in Alzheimer group and 60 percent in vascular dementia group had abnormal pattern shift visual evoked potential. Only in Alzheimer group visual evoked potential P100 latency was significantly higher than control group and in other groups, there was no significant difference. Also there was no significant difference between groups in the study of flash visual evoked potential variables including P1, N2, P2 and N3. Conclusion: This study showed that only Alzheimer was associated with a significant increase in visual evoked potential P100 latency. On the other hand the other hand, there was no significant difference in flash visual evoked potential variables including P1, N2, P2 and N3 between different groups which shows that flash visual evoked potential cannot differentiate between Alzheimer dementia, vascular dementia, patients with minimally conscious impairment and normal people.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".