Attitude to the disease and quality of life in elderly patients with mild vascular dementia after the novel coronavirus infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to study the types of attitude towards the disease and quality of life (QoL) in elderly patients with mild vascular dementia (MVD) living in the conditions of the psychoneurological institution Social Service House “Severnoye Izmailovo” in Moscow, there were 2 study groups: the patients with the clinical debut of the novel coronavirus infection (NCVI) of 6 months +/– 1 month with the recovery outcome (n=65; 33 men, 32 women) and those who did not have COVID-19 (hospital control group; n=67; 34 men, 33 women). The mean age of the studied patients was 73.05±3.48 years. The age and sex composition of the two groups was homogeneous (p>0.05). Emotional disorders were investigated using the Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD); cognitive disorders – by means of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA); QoL – by the Quality of Life in Alzheimer's Disease scale (QoL-AD): QoL self-assessment (QoL-AD-SR (self-rating)) and proxy QoL rating (QoL-AD-PR (proxy rating)); the type of attitude towards the disease – by the TATD scale (Wasserman L.I. et al., 2005). It was found that COVID-19 aggravates cognitive deficits in patients with MVD (according to MoCA 20.80±0.59 /21.40±0.78 points; p<0.05) in the absence of depression (according to CSDD 1.52±0.50 / 1.52±0.84 points in the group of the patients after NCVI / hospital control group, respectively; p>0.05). In the patients after COVID-19, a correlation was found between the proxy QoL rating and the severity of cognitive dysfunction according to the MoCA (R= – 0.28), while in the hospital control group – between the proxy QoL rating and the severity of depressive manifestations (R= – 0.33). The first group of the patients was characterized by a mixed type of attitude to the disease and intrapsychic maladaptation (the neurasthenic type ranked first at 16.03±8.29 / 9.34±5.03 points), while the second group had a diffuse type of attitude to the disease and interpsychic maladaptation (the sensitive type ranked first at 10.31±5.71 / 14.90±7.62 points by the TATD scale among the elderly patients with MVD who have / have not undergone NCVI; p<0.05). The revealed patterns can contribute to the optimization of personalized models of medical and psychological rehabilitation of elderly patients with MVD living in closed-type care facilities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".