Cognition in the first week after stroke: how does it relate to personal and instrumental activities of daily living at follow-up?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is routinely used during the early assessment of people after stroke to indicate cognitive effects and inform clinical decision-making. Aim: The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between cognition in the first week post-stroke and personal and instrumental activities of daily skills at 1 month and 3 months post-stroke. Method: A prospective cohort study consecutively recruited people admitted to the acute stroke ward. Acute cognitive status was measured using the MoCA within 1 week post-stroke onset. Functional outcomes were measured using the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and the Australian Modified Lawton’s Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale (Lawton’s) at 1 month and 3 months post-stroke. Results: Fifty participants with predominantly mild stroke ( n = 47) and mean age of 69.8 achieved a mean MoCA score of 23.1. Controlling for age, the MoCA was associated with the overall FIM score at 1 month ( P = 0.02). It was nearing significance for the Lawton’s at 1 month ( P = 0.06) but was not associated with either outcome at 3 months. A score of less than 23 on the MoCA was indicative of lower scores on both outcomes. Conclusions: A low MoCA score within 1 week of stroke may indicate need for support or rehabilitation due to early impacts on personal activities of daily living, but is not associated with poor functional outcomes at 3 months.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".