MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391438907 · doi:10.1161/str.55.suppl_1.tp38

Abstract TP38: Cognitive Decline After Stroke Correlates With Small Vessel Disease and Race

2024· article· en· W4391438907 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karly Pikel, Lawson Logue, Matthew Germroth, Michael Parrish, Caylee McCain, Souvik Sen

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)Cognitive declineRace (biology)DiseaseCognitionCardiologyInternal medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationGerontologyDementiaPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: An Asian study found 30% of patients showed a cognitive decline measured by Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score one year after stroke. There is limited US data on this subject. We investigated 1) decline rate in MoCA one year post-stroke 2) racial differences in baseline MoCA post-stroke and 3) if racial differences in small vessel disease (SVD) correlated with the decline in MoCA. Methods: MoCA was assessed in the PREMIERS trial (NCT#02541032) at baseline and one year after index stroke. Sub-scores for each MoCA domain were combined into a total score. The Fazekas scale was used to rate white matter signal abnormalities on patient MRI FLAIR images at baseline. Patients were categorized by total, deep white matter (DWM), and periventricular white matter scores. They were then sub-categorized into none/mild or moderate/severe groups. A one year cognitive decline was defined as a decline in MoCA scores by ≥2 points. Results: Of 280 patients, 30.4% had a ≥2 decline in MoCA score, with no significant difference between AA and white (29.4% vs. 32.9%, p=0.57). However, AA patients had lower baseline total MoCA scores (20.4±4.6 vs. 22.6±3.9, p<0.001), visuospatial/executive (3.1±1.5 vs. 3.7±1.3, p<0.001), naming (2.5±0.7 vs. 2.8±0.4, p=0.001), and attention (4.2±2.1 vs. 4.9±1.9, p<0.001) sub-scores. Overall, baseline MoCA was lower in patients with moderate/severe total Fazekas scores (20.1±5.0 vs. 21.6±4.2, p=0.015) and DWM sub-scores (20.1±5.2 vs. 21.4±4.2, p=0.048). In AA, baseline MoCA remained lower in patients with moderate/severe total Fazekas scores (19.6±5.1 vs. 21.0±4.2, p=0.039) and DWM sub-scores (19.4±5.5 vs. 21.0±4.1, p=0.055). This was contrary to White patients with moderate/severe total Fazekas scores (22.3. ±4.4 vs. 23.0±3.9, p=0.50) and DWM sub-scores (23.1±2.3 vs. 22.7±4.4, p=0.73). Conclusion: We report that 30.4% of patients in this US-based study showed a decline in MoCA score one year post-stroke, which aligns with a similar study conducted in Asia. A significant association was found between the AA race and lower baseline total MoCA score compared to white patients. Moderate/severe total and DWM Fazekas scores are also significantly associated with lower baseline MoCA scores, a finding specific to AA patients.

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)0.001
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207