MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3082843598 · doi:10.1089/neu.2020.7206

Prevalence of Cognitive Complaints and Impairment in Patients with Chronic Subdural Hematoma and Recovery after Treatment: A Systematic Review

2020· review· en· W3082843598 on OpenAlex
Jurre Blaauw, Anke G. Boxum, Bram Jacobs, Rob J. M. Groen, Wilco C. Peul, Korné Jellema, Rúben Dammers, Niels A. van der Gaag, Hester F. Lingsma, Heleen M. den Hertog, Joukje van der Naalt

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurotrauma · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurosurgical Procedures and Complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersZonMw
KeywordsMedicineCognitionPediatricsGlasgow Coma ScaleConfidence intervalPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) is a frequently occurring neurological disease associated with older age and use of anticoagulants. Symptoms vary from headaches to coma, but cognitive deficits can also be present. However, exact prevalence and severity of cognitive deficits in CSDH are still unknown. In this systematic review, we aim to assess cognitive status of patients with CSDH, at presentation and after treatment. PubMed, Embase and PsycInfo were searched for articles concerning cognition in CSDH. We divided cognitive changes into subjective cognitive deficit (cognitive complaints [CC]) and objective cognitive deficit (cognitive impairment [CI]). Two reviewers independently selected studies for inclusion and subsequently extracted data. Quality assessment was done by means of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Reported prevalence of CC and CI was pooled with random effects meta-analysis. Out of 799 identified references, 22 met inclusion criteria. Twenty-one articles reported on prevalence of CC/CI and one study reported solely on CSDH patients with cognitive deficit. Estimated pooled prevalence of both CC and CI in CSDH at presentation was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 36-54%). Four studies concerned a prospective evaluation of the effect of surgical treatment on cognition. These proved to be of fair to good quality after quality assessment. The estimated pre-treatment prevalence of objectified cognitive impairment was 61% (95% CI: 51-70%) decreasing to 18% (95% CI: 8-32%) post-surgery. From this review it can be concluded that CC and CI are very common in CSDH, with a tendency to improve after treatment. Therefore, we underline the importance of increased attention to cognitive status of these patients, with proper testing methods and treatment-testing intervals.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.679

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it