The assessment of cognitive impairment in maintenance hemodialysis patients and the relationship between cognitive impairment and depressive symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cognitive impairment and depression are common mental health problems in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients with maintenance hemodialysis (MHD). Previous studies have proven that cognitive impairment and depression were risk factors for poor prognosis in MHD patients. However, the related factors of cognitive function and the association between cognitive impairment and depression in MHD patients are still unclear. The purpose of this study is to explore the related factors affecting the cognitive function of MHD patients and evaluate the relationship between cognitive function and depression in MHD patients. METHODS: This single-center, cross-sectional study enrolled 160 MHD patients. Cognitive function and depressive symptoms were measured using Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), respectively. RESULTS: Cognitive impairment was detected in 58.1% of 160 MHD patients. Multivariate linear regression analysis showed that age, level of education and homocysteine (HCY) were independent influencing factors of MoCA scores and the scores of attention and abstract thinking were independently correlated with PHQ-9 score after adjusting for confounding factors CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicated that age, level of education and HCY were independently associated with cognitive function, and attention and abstract thinking could independently affect depressive symptoms in MHD patients.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".