The relationship between carotid intima-media thickness and cognitive function and depression in postmenopausal women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Atherosclerosis, cognitive impairment, and depression are common entities in postmenopausal patients. Our aim was to ascertain the relationship between the carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) and cognitive function and depression in postmenopausal women. Material and methods: test and Spearman correlation were used. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and odds ratio (OR) were calculated. Results: Seventy-five patients were studied. The median of age was 52 years (31-76), and the IMT was 1.1 mm (0.6-0.20). The HDRS score was 8.9 (1-21), and that of the MMSE was 29 (18-30). After dividing the group according to the presence or absence of depression, it was found that age and IMT were greater in the group with depression, and the MMSE score was greater in the group without depression. After dividing according to the MMSE score, age and HDRS score were significantly greater in the group with cognitive impairment. The intima-media thickness had an OR of 12.2 (2.6-58.0) for cognitive impairment and an OR of 5.2 (1.9-14.1) for depression. Conclusions: The intima-media thickness is associated with greater risk of cognitive impairment and depression.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".