HUBUNGAN NILAI ANKLE BRACHIAL INDEKS DENGAN FUNGSI KOGNITIF PADA LANJUT USIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peningkatan angka harapan hidup menyebabkan pergeseran pola penyakit dari penyakit infeksi ke penyakit degeneratif seperti hipertensi, diabetes melitus, serta aterosklerosis. Aterosklerosis pada tahap awal yang dikenal dengan atherosclerosis asimptomatis sering ditandai dengan adanya Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD). Ankle Brachial Index (ABI) adalah ratio tekanan sistolik ankle dan brachial yang dapat digunakan untuk menilai severitas oklusi arteri perifer yang merupakan gambaran penyumbatan arteri secara umum. Tujuan penelitian adalah untuk mengetahui hubungan antara nilai ABI dengan fungsi kognitif. Penelitian dilakukan pada 75 pasien lanjut usia yang berobat ke poliklinik saraf RS DR M Djamil Padang dengan metode consecutive sampling. Pemeriksaan fungsi kognitif menggunakan Indonesia Montreal Cognitive Assessment (InaMoCA). Data dianalisa dengan uji χ2 dengan nilai p<0,05. Hasil penelitian didapatkan gangguan sebanyak 48 orang (64%). Nilai ABI yang rendah sejumlah 31 orang (41,3%), normal 44 orang (58,7%). Tidak didapatkan hubungan langsung antara nilai ABI dengan fungsi kognitif (p>0,05). Namun setelah sampel dispesifikasikan berdasarkan jenis kelamin, hubungan antara ABI dengan fungsi kognitif pada wanita bermakna secara statistik (p<0,05). Kesimpulannya, tidak terdapat hubungan antara nilai ABI dengan fungsi kognitif pada lanjut usia, namun terdapat hubungan antara nilai ABI dengan fungsi kognitif pada lanjut usia berjenis kelamin wanita.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.004 |
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".