MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

血尿酸与脑小血管病患者血管性轻度认知障碍的相关性研究 Correlation between Serum Uric Acid and Vascular Mild Cognitive Impairment in Patients with Cerebral Small Vessel Disease

2018· article· ja· W4391740230 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
高鸣 李衍芳

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageja
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUric acidCognitive impairmentCorrelationDiseaseInternal medicineCardiologyMedicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

目的 探讨血尿酸(uric acid,UA)与脑小血管病(cerebral small vessel disease,CSVD)患者血管性轻度 认知障碍(vascular mild cognitive impairment,VaMCI)的相关性。 方法 选择2015年10月-2017年6月于潍坊医学院附属医院就诊的87例CSVD患者和44例体检者,根据 蒙特利尔评估表(montreal cognitive assessment,MoCA)将CSVD患者分为VaMCI组47例和认知正常组40 例,用Logistic回归分析及Pearson相关分析来分析尿酸与脑小血管病患者轻度认知障碍的相关性。 结果 CSVD认知正常组及轻度认知障碍组血UA水平([ 315.15±56.76)μmol/L,(363.32±42.58) μmol/L]高于对照组([ 269.66±40.21)μmol/L](均P<0.001),且CSVD轻度认知障碍组血尿酸水平 高于认知正常组(P <0.001)。轻度认知损害组UA水平与其MoCA总分、视空间与执行能力、记忆、语 言呈负相关(r =-0.351,P =0.015;r =-0.456,P =0.001;r =-0.408,P =0.004;r =-0.329,P =0.024)。 Logistic回归分析结果显示,血UA水平[比值比(odds ratio,OR)1.020,95%可信区间(confidence interval, CI)1.009~1.032,P =0.01]是CSVD患者轻度认知障碍的独立危险因素。 结论 CSVD血管性轻度认知障碍患者血UA升高,且血UA是CSVD患者轻度认知障碍的危险因素。UA 水平与CSVD血管性轻度认知障碍患者蒙特利尔评估总分、视空间与执行能力、记忆、语言呈负相关。 Abstract: Objective To investigate the correlation between serum uric acid (UA) and vascular mild cognitive impairment (VaMCI) in patients with cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD). Methods Between October 2015 and June 2017, 87 patients with CSVD and 44 healthy individuals were enrolled from department of neurology of the affiliated hospital of weifang medical university. According to the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) scale, the patients with CSVD were divided into the VaMCI group (n =47) and normal cognition group (n =40). The association between serum UA and VaMCI in patients with CSVD was analyzed by Logistic regression analysis and Pearson correlation analysis. Results Compared with the control group [(269.66±40.21) μmol/L], serum UA levels in the normal cognition and VaMCI groups [(315.15±56.76) μmol/L, (363.32±42.58) μmol/L] were increased (all P <0.001). Serum UA level was higher in the VaMCI group than that in the normal cognition group (P <0.001). Serum UA level was negatively correlated with MoCA total score, subscores on visuospatial ability and executive function, recall, and language ability (r =-0.351, P =0.015; r =-0.456, P =0.001; r =-0.408, P =0.004, r =-0.329, P =0.024). Logistic regression analysis showed that serum UA level [odds ratio (OR) 1.020, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.009-1.032, P =0.01) was independent risk factor of vascular mild cognitive impairment in patients with CSVD . Conclusion Serum UA level was significantly increased in the VaMCI group, and UA level might be a risk factor of VaMCI in patients with CSVD. Serum UA level was negatively correlated with MoCA total score, subscores on visuospatial ability and executive function, recall, and language ability.

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)0.005
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.300 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207