A study on the characteristics of cognitive function in patients with multiple system atrophy in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nonmotor symptoms in patients with multiple system atrophy (MSA) have received an increasing amount of attention in recent years, but no research on MSA patients' cognitive characteristics has been conducted in China. To evaluate the cognitive function of MSA patients in China. Using a case-control study design, 256 MSA patients and 64 controls were evaluated by the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) scale to characterize their cognitive function. Like the controls, 60.5% of the patients with MSA had cognitive impairment, but the characteristics of cognitive impairment between the two groups were different. The cognitive impairment in MSA patients was prominent in the cognitive domains of visuospatial/executive functions, naming, attention, and orientation; particularly, the visuospatial/executive functions were the most significantly impaired, while impairment in language function was mainly seen in the controls. Besides, impairments in visuospatial/executive functions, attention, language, and orientation were more prominent in MSA-P (MSA with predominant Parkinsonism) patients than in MSA-C (MSA with predominant cerebellar ataxia). The cognitive impairments were more severe in patients with probable MSA than in patients with possible MSA. In addition, the results showed that the level of cognitive function was negatively correlated with the severity of MSA. This study, which characterized the cognitive function of MSA patients with the largest sample size known so far in China, found that patients with MSA do have cognitive impairment and display specific characteristics. Therefore, the cognitive impairment of MSA should be paid more attention.The study has been registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) (Registration No: ChiCTR1900022462).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".