Cognitive Profile in Patients Admitted to Intensive Rehabilitation after Stroke Is Associated with the Recovery of Dysphagia: Preliminary Results from the RIPS (Intensive Post-Stroke Rehabilitation) Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Dysphagia represents one of the most frequent symptoms in the post–acute stroke population. Swallowing impairment and cognitive deficits can often co-occur. This study aims to investigate the relationship between cognitive impairment and the recovery of dysphagia in patients attending specific rehabilitation. Patients admitted to intensive rehabilitation units were administered the Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) and Montreal Cognitive Screening Test (MoCA); when screening positive for dysphagia, they entered a rehabilitation program. Their FOIS score at discharge was the primary outcome measure. In the multivariate analysis, younger age (B = − 0.077, p = 0.017), higher MoCA (B = 0.191, p = 0.002), and higher FOIS (B = 1.251, p = 0.032) at admission were associated with higher FOIS at discharge. When executive function (EF) replaced the MoCA total score in the model, younger age (B = − 0.134, p = 0.001), higher admission EF (B = 1.451, p < 0.001), and FOIS (B = 1.348, p = 0.035) were associated with higher FOIS at discharge. Our results confirm the hypothesis that a better cognitive profile upon admission is associated with a higher probability of dysphagia recovery at discharge. EF seems to have a crucial role in dysphagia recovery. These results highlight the importance of considering the cognitive profile when assessing and treating dysphagia after stroke and of using screening tests that include executive functions.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it