Correlation Between Saccadic Eye Movement, Activities of Daily Living, and Cognitive Function in Elderly Patients With Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to analyze the correlation between saccadic eye movement, activities of daily living, and cognitive function in elderly patients with stroke, that could help establish interventions in clinical settings. This study included 32 elderly patients with stroke who were admitted to a medical center. The King-Devick test (K-D test), Korean version of the Modified Barthel Index (K-MBI), and Korean version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-K) were used as evaluation tools. The correlation between evaluation scores was analyzed using Pearson’s correlation coefficient. The correlations between the total scores of the K-D test, K-MBI, and MoCA-K were statistically significant (p<0.01). In addition, the K-D test showed statistically significant correlations with personal hygiene, bathing, feeding, toilet, stair climbing, dressing, chair/bed transfer, ambulation, and wheelchair use in the K-MBI and visuospatial/executive, naming, delayed recall, and orientation in the MoCA-K. This study showed a correlation between saccadic eye movement, activities of daily living, and cognitive function in elderly patients with stroke. In the future, such studies with larger sample would help to establish interventions in clinical settings.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".