MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4385754619 · doi:10.1101/2023.08.03.23293529

Characteristics of Cerebellar Cognitive Affective Syndrome (CCAS) in patients with acute cerebellar stroke and its impact on outcome

2023· preprint· en· W4385754619 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tokuaki Shinya, Kota Yamauchi, Shota Tanaka, Kei Goto, Shuji Arakawa

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterquartile rangeStroke (engine)Montreal Cognitive AssessmentMedicineRating scalePhysical therapyPsychologyCognitionFunctional Independence MeasureInternal medicineActivities of daily livingCognitive impairmentPsychiatryDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Recently, cerebellar cognitive affective syndrome-scale (CCAS-S) was developed to assess CCAS—a syndrome in which cognitive impairment is caused by cerebellar lesions. Literature regarding CCAS in patients with stroke is scarce, and its impact on outcomes is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate CCAS in patients with acute cerebellar stroke and examine its relationship with the outcomes. Methods Patients who experienced acute cerebellar stroke for the first time and were hospitalized in Steel Memorial Yawata Hospital within 7 days of stroke onset between April 2021 and April 2023 were included in this observational study. CCAS-S, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA) scores were measured 1 week after stroke onset, and Functional Independence measure (FIM)/Barthel Index (BI) at discharge, physical function, activities of daily life (ADL), length of hospital stay, and outcome (discharge destination) were evaluated. The Mann–Whitney U test was used to compare CCAS-S scores and variables. Results Thirteen consecutive patients with acute cerebellar stroke (9 women) and age-and sex-matched healthy controls (7 women) were included. The MMSE score was within the normal range in all patients; however, patients with stroke had a lower total CCAS-S score (median 72, interquartile range [IQR] 66–80) and a higher number of failed tests (median 4, IQR 3–5) than those of healthy controls. Significant deficits were observed in semantic fluency (p=0.008), category switching (p=0001), and similarity (p=009). Possible, probable, and definite CCAS were diagnosed in 2, 1, and 10 patients, respectively. Patients discharged home showed better SARA and FIM/BI scores but similar CCAS-S scores compared to those discharged to rehabilitation hospitals. Conclusion CCAS along with impaired executive and language functions is frequently observed in patients with acute cerebellar stroke; however, impaired motor function, and not CCAS, influences the outcome.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicVestibular and auditory disorders→French-language works237,207→