Recognition of cognitive impairment and depressive symptoms in older patients with heart failure
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cognitive impairment and depression in patients with heart failure (HF) are common comorbidities and are associated with increased morbidity, readmissions and mortality. Timely recognition of cognitive impairment and depression is important for providing optimal care. The aim of our study was to determine if these disorders were recognised by clinicians and, secondly, if they were associated with hospital admissions and mortality within 6 months' follow-up. METHODS: Patients (aged ≥65 years) diagnosed with HF were included from the cardiology outpatient clinic of Gelre Hospitals. Cognitive status was evaluated with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test (score ≤22). Depressive symptoms were assessed with the Geriatric Depression Scale (score >5). Patient characteristics were collected from electronic patient files. The clinician was blinded to the tests and asked to assess cognitive status and mood. RESULTS: We included 157 patients. Their median age was 79 years (65-92); 98 (62%) were male. The majority had New York Heart Association functional class II. Cognitive impairment was present in 56 (36%) patients. Depressive symptoms were present in 21 (13%) patients. In 27 of 56 patients (48%) cognitive impairment was not recognised by clinicians. Depressive symptoms were not recognised in 11 of 21 patients (52%). During 6 months' follow-up 24 (15%) patients were readmitted for HF-related reasons and 18 (11%) patients died. There was no difference in readmission and mortality rate between patients with or without cognitive impairment and patients with or without depressive symptoms. CONCLUSION: Cognitive impairment and depressive symptoms were infrequently recognised during outpatient clinic visits.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it