STUDY ON CORRELATION BETWEEN POST STROKE DEPRESSION AND COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. Our study was designed to assess the cognitive impairment after ischemic stroke and to study its correlation with poststroke depression. \nMethods. We studied a series of 94 consecutive patients (45 men and 49 women, mean age 68,9 years) with acute first-ever ischemic stroke. The patients underwent a neurological and neuropsychological examination at baseline, after 6 months and after 12 months. For the cognitive assessment we used Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and for the evaluation of depression we used Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS). \nResults. Depression was diagnosed in 48 patients (49%) at 6 months and in 55 of the patients (54%) at 12 months after ischemic stroke. The cognitive impairment was higher at 12 months than at 6 months; the depressive patients had more severe cognitive impairment than the nondepressive patients. \nConclusions. A lot of patients suffer from depression after stroke, and the frequency of depression seems to increase during the first year. The post stroke depression (PSD) is correlated with the cognitive impairment. We emphasize the importance of psychiatric \nassessment of stroke 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".