Montreal cognitive assessment in Brazilian adults with sickle cell disease: The burdens of poor sociocultural background
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Sickle cell disease (SCD) patients are at higher risk of developing silent cerebral infarcts and overt stroke, which may reflect cognitive impairment, functional limitations, and worse quality of life. The cognitive function of Brazilian adult SCD patients ( n = 124; 19–70 years; 56 men; 79 SS, 28 SC, 10 S/β 0 , 7 S/β + ) was screened through Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and correlated the results with possible predictive factors for test performance, including sociocultural, clinical, laboratory data and brain imaging. The Median MoCA score was 23 (8–30); 70% had a 25‐or‐less score, suggesting some level of cognitive impairment. There were no significant associations between MoCA results and any clinical or laboratory data in SS and SC patients; however, a significant correlation ( P = 0.03) with stroke was found in HbS/β‐thalassemic patients. Correlations were further detected according to sociodemographic conditions, such as age ( r = −0.316; P < 0.001), age at first job ( r = 0.221; P = 0.018), personal ( r = 0.23; P = 0.012) and per capita familiar incomes ( r = 0.303; P = 0.001), personal ( r = 0.61; P = 0), maternal ( r = 0.536; P = 0), and paternal educational status ( r = 0.441; P = 0). We further sought independent predictors of performance using multivariable regressions and increased education was an independent predictor of better scores in MoCA (0.8099, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.509–1.111). Brain imaging analysis showed significant and progressive atrophy in important cerebral areas related to memory, learning, and executive function. These data point to the high prevalence and impact of cognitive decline in adult SCD patients, mirrored in brain atrophic areas. It is also possible to observe the influence of sociodemographic conditions on patients’ cognitive performances and the need for creating focused therapeutic plans that address these deficiencies. Moreover, the absence of a significant correlation of MoCA values with stroke in the SS and SC groups may be related to the worst sociocultural and economic conditions of the Brazilian African descent population, in which the impact of low educational stimulation on cognitive function can outweigh even the anatomical damage caused by the disease.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".