MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210855991 · doi:10.1016/s0003-2778(13)80023-8

Poster Presentations

2013· article· en· W4210855991 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Anatomical Society of India · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRestless Legs Syndrome Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We aimed to investigate subjective sleep quality and polysomnographic sleep structure features in patients with vascular cognitive impairment-no dementia (VCIND).Fifty-six patients with VCIND, 48 patients with simple stroke (without cognitive impairment), and 48 control subjects were included. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and polysomnography (PSG) were used to analyze their sleep characteristics. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was conducted to assess mental state.Patients with VCIND had higher PSQI scores compared with control subjects and simple stroke patients (P < .01). PSG revealed that patients with VCIND or stroke were more likely to experience prolonged sleep latency (SL), decreased sleep efficiency (SE), increased arousal, and reduced deep sleep and rapid eye movement (REM) sleep than controls. Patients with VCIND had significantly longer SL, increased periodic leg movements in sleep (PLMS), decreased SE, and increased arousal and sleep fragmentation compared to patients with simple stroke (P < .05). In VCIND patients, a significant positive correlation was found between SE and MoCA scores (r = 0.632; P < .001), though PSQI, SL, and arousal index were significantly negatively associated with MoCA scores (r = −0.787, −0.740, −0.772, respectively; P < .001 for all).VCIND patients had different abnormal sleep features, including decreased SE, increased PLMS, and prolonged SL and sleep fragmentation. Abnormal sleep in VCIND may be associated with cognitive impairment.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.469
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.312 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Anatomical Society of IndiaSame topicRestless Legs Syndrome ResearchFrench-language works237,207