COGNITIVE FUNCTIONS IN MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS PATIENTS DEPENDING ON THE DIFFERENT RISK FACTORS PRESENCE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim: To clarify the influence of different risk factors on cognitive impairment (CI) in general and in separate domains and their association with MRI findings in patients with relapsing-remitting (RRMS) and progressive forms of multiple sclerosis (SPMS and PPMS). Materials and methods: One hundred and thirty-seven participants with MS (102 females and 35 males) aged from 22 to 69 years were enrolled into this study. All patients completed the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) and undergone MRI. Results: According to MS phenotypes all participants were divided into two groups: patients with RRMS (n= 106) and with progressive phenotypes (n= 31). A significant positive correlation was present between MoCA and BDI scores in all participants (p= 0,0015). Presence of anxiety did not demonstrate any valid influence on cognitive performance, although severe anxiety was significantly more often found in subjects with progressive phenotypes in presence of brain atrophy (p= 0,0028). Patients with higher education had no CI more frequently compare to those without it (p= 0,0019), whereas, participants smoking cigarettes had higher prevalence of severe CI than non-smokers (p= 0,0061). Conclusions: Among cognitive domains memory, visual-spatial and executive functions, abstract thinking were impaired the most in MS patients, though abstract thinking was more often affected in progressive forms. The results demonstrated that physical disability, depression and smoking negatively impacted cognitive performance, meanwhile presence of higher education demonstrated a favorable influence on cognition in MS 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 | 0.000 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".