Characteristics of Mild Cognitive Impairment and Associated Factors in MSA Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in multiple-system atrophy (MSA) patients is common but remains poorly characterized, and the related factors are unclear. This retrospective study included 200 consecutive patients with a clinical diagnosis of possible or probable MSA, 102 MSA patients with MCI (MSA-MCI), and 98 MSA patients with normal cognition (MSA-NC). Cognitive profiles were compared between MSA-MCI and MSA-NC patients using the MoCA. In addition, demographic as well as major motor and nonmotor symptom differences were compared between MSA-MCI and MSA-NC patients. The median MMSE score was 26 points. Overall, MSA-MCI was observed in 51% of patients, with predominant impairment in visuospatial, executive, and attention functions compared with MSA-NC patients. MSA-MCI patients were older (p = 0.015) and had a later onset age (p = 0.024) and a higher frequency of hypertension, motor onset, and MSA with the predominant parkinsonism (MSA-P) phenotype than MSA-NC patients. The positive rate of orthostatic hypotension (OH) in MSA-MCI patients was significantly decreased and depression/anxiety was significantly increased compared with MSA-NC patients (p = 0.004). Multivariate logistic analysis showed that motor onset was independently associated with MCI in MSA patients. MSA-MCI patients had impairment in visuospatial, executive, and attention functions. More prominent memory impairment was observed in MSA-P than in MSA-C patients. Motor onset was independently associated with MCI in MSA patients. MCI was commonly presented in MSA with more prominent memory impairment in MSA-P. Future follow-up studies are warranted to identify more factors that influence cognitive impairment in MSA.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".