Cognitive impairment in patients with moderate to severe chronic kidney disease: the Salford kidney cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Cognitive impairment in chronic kidney disease (CKD) is common and underrecognized [1, 2]. Determining risk factors for cognitive impairment and whether speed of CKD progression is an important consideration may help identify cognitive impairment by nephrologists. Vascular disease is thought to underpin cognitive impairment in CKD and by segregating CKD patients with proven vascular disease, we may also be able to discover other important associations with cognitive impairment in CKD patients. Method A total of 250 patients in a UK prospective cohort of CKD patients underwent two cognitive assessments: Montreal Cognitive Assessment test and Trail Making Test. Cognitive impairment was defined using validated population cut-offs (cognitive impairment) and relative cognitive impairment. Relative cognitive impairment was defined by <1 standard deviation below the mean Z-score on any completed test. Two multivariable logistical regression models identified variables associated with cognitive impairment and realtive cognitive impairment. Results About 44 and 24.8% of patients suffered cognitive impairment and relative cognitive impairment, respectively. Depression, previous stroke and older age were significantly associated with cognitive impairment. Older age was significantly associated with relative cognitive impairment (P ≤ 0.05) and higher proteinuria and the use of psychodynamic medications were also significantly associated with relative cognitive impairment (P = 0.05). Delta estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in patients with cognitive impairment and relative cognitive impairment compared with those having normal cognition was similar (−0.77 versus −1.35 mL/min/1.73 m2/year, P = 0.34 for cognitive impairment and −1.12 versus −1.02 mL/min/1.73 m2/year, P = 0.89 for relative cognitive impairment). Conclusion Risk factors for cognitive impairment in CKD include previous stroke, depression or anxiety, higher proteinuria and prescription of psychodynamic medications. Patients with a faster eGFR decline do not represent a group of patients at increased risk of cognitive impairment.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".