The neuropsychological assessment battery (NAB) is a valuable tool for evaluating neuropsychological outcome after aneurysmatic subarachnoid hemorrhage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Detecting and treating neuropsychological deficits after aneurysmatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) play a key role in regaining independence; however, detecting deficits relevant to social and professional reintegration has been difficult and optimal timing of assessments remains unclear. Therefore, we evaluated the feasibility of administering the Neuropsychological Assessment Battery screening module (NAB-S) to patients with aSAH, assessed its value in predicting the ability to return to work and characterized clinical as well as neuropsychological recovery over the period of 24 months. METHODS: A total of 104 consecutive patients treated for aSAH were recruited. After acute treatment, follow up visits were conducted at 3, 12 and 24 months after the hemorrhage. NAB-S, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and physical examination were performed at each follow up visit. RESULTS: The NAB-S could be administered to 64.9, 75.9 and 88.9% of the patients at 3, 12 and 24 months, respectively. Moderate impairment of two or more neuropsychological domains (e.g speech, executive function, etc.) significantly correlated with inability to return to work at 12 and 24 months as well as poor outcome assessed by the extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) at 3, 12 and 24 months. The number of patients with favorable outcomes significantly increased from 25.5% at discharge to 56.5 and 57.1% at 3 and 12 months, respectively, and further increased to 74.1% after 24 months. CONCLUSION: The NAB-S can be administered to the majority of patients with aSAH and can effectively detect clinically relevant neuropsychological deficits. Clinical recovery after aSAH continues for at least 24 months after the hemorrhage which should be considered in the design of future clinical trials.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".