[Retracted] Effects of Carotid Artery Stent and Carotid Endarterectomy on Cognitive Function in Patients with Carotid Stenosis
Post-publication record
Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background . Carotid artery stenosis is closely related to cognitive dysfunction, in which decreased cerebral perfusion is one of the important factors. Both carotid artery stent implantation and carotid endarterectomy can relieve stenosis and increase cerebral perfusion. In this study, we aimed to compare the effects of carotid artery stent implantation and endarterectomy on cognitive function. Methods . A total of 98 patients with carotid artery stenosis hospitalized in our hospital from July 2015 to January 2017 were included. Among them, 50 cases underwent carotid artery stent implantation treatment as stent implantation group (CAS group), and 48 cases underwent carotid artery endarterectomy treatment as carotid endarterectomy group (CEA group). Using the Mini‐Mental State Examination Scale (MMSE Scale) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MoCA Scale), the cognitive function scores of the two groups of patients before and after 3 and 6 months of operation were measured, and the patients were also measured before and after surgery, after the serum NSE, hs‐CRP content. Results . The serum NSE, hs‐CRP content, MMSE score, and MoCA score of the two groups before treatment were not statistically significant ( P > 0.05). The MMSE score and MoCA score of the two groups of patients before treatment were lower than the normal value, suggesting carotid artery stenosis combined with different degrees of cognitive dysfunction. Carotid artery stenosis is different, and patients’ cognitive function is also different. The MMSE score and MoCA score of the two groups at 3 and 6 months after operation were higher than before treatment, and there was a statistically significant difference between 6 and 3 months after operation ( P < 0.05), but at each time There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups ( P > 0.05). The NSE content of the two groups of patients after operation decreased compared with that before treatment, and the decrease in 6 months after operation was more obvious than that in March ( P < 0.05). However, the difference between the two groups at each time point was not statistically significant ( P > 0.05). The content of hs‐CRP in the two groups of patients was higher than that before the operation, and the CAS group was significantly higher than the CEA group; the difference was statistically significant ( P < 0.05). Conclusion . Carotid artery stent and carotid endarterectomy are effective in improving the cognitive function of patients with carotid stenosis, but there is no significant difference between the two.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".