Effect of hyperbaric oxygen therapy on cognitive impairment after aneurysm subarachnoid hemorrhage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the effect of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) on cognitive impairment after aneurysm subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). Methods: The current study was carried out in a regional neurosurgical center in Taiyuan, Shanxi Province of China from January 2019 to September 2020. A total of 150 patients with persistent cognitive dysfunction at 3 months after aSAH onset were enrolled, which were randomly classified into group A (HBOT) and group B (control) via the random number table method. The outcome was evaluated by Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA). Results: There were no significant differences between group A and group B with regard to MoCA score and proportions of normal MoCA patients at 3 months after HBOT (p > 0.05). Both groups showed no significant differences in proportions of normal MoCA patients at 6 months after HBOT (p > 0.05). However, there were significant differences between group A and group B with MoCA score of patients at 6 months after HBOT (p < 0.05). There were also significant differences in MoCA score and proportions of normal MoCA patients at 9 months after HBOT. Conclusion: HBOT alleviates cognitive impairment after aSAH, and thus may be used to manage cognitive impairment in patients after aSAH. However, further clinical trials are required prior to application in clinical practice.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".