MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4316091532 · doi:10.14748/orl.v18i2.8767

Methods of cognitive status research in patients with glioblastoma

2022· article· en· W4316091532 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
E. Moynova, Yavor Enchev, M. Moynov, G. Stoyanov, Bogomil Iliev, T. Kondev, S. Marianova, Arda Demirci

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Bulletin of Otorhinolaryngology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentNeuropsychologyMedicineNeurosurgeryNeuropsychological assessmentNeuropsychological testQuality of life (healthcare)CognitionPsychologyPediatricsPsychiatryCognitive impairment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Glioblastoma is a high-grade, aggressive central nervous system tumor with predominantly astrocytic differentiation, characterized by fast invasive growth into the surrounding brain parenchyma and aggressive clinical course. The short life expectancy of patients diagnosed with glioblastoma necessitates the need to maximize their quality of remaining life. One of the most common reasons for quality of life impairment in these patients is the cognitive deficit accompanying the disease. There is a lack of a unified and standardized method for the assessment of cognitive functions in these patients, which meets all the necessary criteria to be convenient and usable in the wide clinical practice. Aim: The aim of the present study is to compare the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) brief screening test with an extended neuropsychological examination to determine its applicability in patients diagnosed with glioblastoma. Material and methods: The study includes 27 patients undergoing neurosurgical intervention for histologically proven IDH-wildtype glioblastoma in the Department of Neurosurgery, “St. Marina” University Hospital – a tertiary healthcare center, for the period January 2019 to December 2022. Preoperatively, patients were examined with the short MoCA screening test and an extended neuropsychological examination including the following subtests: Issac set test, Trail making test A and B, Luria test, Raven‘s color matrices, Stroop test and Bender test. Results: Of all the patients studied, those with a MoCA score below 26 points present at least one negative test of the extended neuropsychological examination. MoCA patients with scores of 26 or more do not demonstrate cognitive impairment in the extended neuropsychological impairment. Conclusion: The obtained results support the claim that the MoCA short screening test is applicable for preoperative diagnosis of cognitive disorders in patients with glioblastoma. Due to the study‘s small sample size, further research is needed to definitively prove this claim.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Bulletin of OtorhinolaryngologySame topicCancer-related cognitive impairment studiesFrench-language works237,207