MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3142836844 · doi:10.15829/1560-4071-2021-4194

Sex characteristics of cognitive functions assessed by the MMSE and MoCA scores in patients with coronary artery disease

2021· article· en· W3142836844 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
И. В. Тарасова, О. А. Трубникова, А. S. Sosnina, И. Д. Сырова, И. Н. Кухарева, D. S. Kupriyanova, О. Л. Барбараш

Bibliographic record

VenueRussian Journal of Cardiology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentOdds ratioInternal medicineConfidence intervalCoronary artery diseaseCohortMini–Mental State ExaminationCognitionCardiologyComorbidityCohort studyProspective cohort studyCognitive impairmentPhysical therapyDiseasePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim. To study the sex characteristics of cognitive functions in a cohort of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) by comparing the results of Mini-mental state examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores. Material and methods. The prospective cohort study included 272 people, including 74 women aged 41 to 82 years, who were admitted to the Research Institute of Complex Issues of Cardiovascular Diseases for CABG surgery. All patients underwent clinical, laboratory, electrophysiological and ultrasound examinations. The Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) was calculated. Assessment of cognitive functions was carried out using the MMSE and MoCA scores. All types of statistical analysis were performed using the STATISTICA 10 program (StatSoft Inc., USA). Results. It was found that women scheduled for CABG have an older age and a higher CCI score compared to men (p=0,008). According to the MMSE, the likelihood of moderate and severe cognitive impairment in men compared with women was 1,36 times higher (odds ratio (OR), 1,35; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0,79-2,32, Z=1,11, p=0,27). The MoCA scores showed that half of the male (49%) and female (50%) participants had severe cognitive impairment. The likelihood of moderate and severe cognitive impairment in men compared with women was 1,33 times higher (OR, 1,33; 95% CI, 0,68-2,59, Z=0,841, p=0,40). According to subtests of the MoCA, men were better in naming (p=0,002), abstraction (p=0,005), and women outperformed men in verbal fluency (p=0,04). Regression analysis revealed that the most significant negative predictors for cognitive status as measured by the MMSE and MoCA scores for men and women were age and CCI. Conclusion. Women scheduled for CABG, having the worst clinical and demographic indicators, are comparable with men in cognitive status using the MMSE score. The MoCA score shows sex differences in naming, abstraction, and verbal fluency domains and revealed a higher percentage of severe cognitive disorders (up to 50%) compared to the MMSE score (7-9%). In male and female candidates for CABG, age and comorbidities are negatively associated with cognitive status.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRussian Journal of CardiologySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207