Outcome measures of cognitive gain in clinical trials of patients with primary central nervous system infections: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Primary central nervous system (CNS) infections are often accompanied with cognitive deficits. Cognitive deficits are assessed by a wide range of outcome measures to determine the severity of deficits and their response to intervention. The aim of this review was to provide description of outcome measures used to assess cognitive function in patients with primary CNS infections enrolled in clinical trials. Method We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL from inception to October 2022 to identify clinical trials that enrolled patients with cognitive deficits due to primary CNS infections. All outcome measures evaluating cognitive function in these clinical trials were considered. Outcome measure was defined as any standardized measure evaluating one or more of the six cognitive domains: complex attention, executive functioning, learning and memory, language, perceptual‐motor ability, and social cognition. Result Eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one pre‐post intervention study enrolled patients with Lyme disease (infectious agent bacterium borrelia burgdorferi), herpes simplex virus type 1 (infectious agent herpes simples virus), and Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease (infectious agent prion). Within these clinical trials, 29 outcome measures were utilized to evaluate change in cognitive function in response to treatment with antibiotics (five studies), antiviral (three studies), or non‐opioid analgesic (one study). Out of all outcome measures, only two assessed all six cognitive domains: Penn computerized neurocognitive battery and Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale; the remaining evaluated one or several cognitive domains using a variety of measures. The three most frequently evaluated cognitive domains were complex attention (19 distinct outcome measures within nine studies), executive functioning (19 distinct outcome measures within eight studies) and perceptual‐motor ability (16 distinct outcome measures within eight studies). The least evaluated cognitive domain was social cognition (four distinct outcome measures within four studies). Conclusion Clinical trials included in this review were designed to improve cognitive function in patients with primary CNS infection. Selection of outcome measures that have been previously used is desirable as it would allow between‐study comparisons. Assessment of social cognition is important to consider. Evaluations using multiple outcome measures might be tiring and intrusive to patients, and therefore implications of practical constraints should be tested.
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 | 0.017 | 0.073 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.012 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".