Characteristics of cognition impairment in patients after stroke based on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We aimed to explore the cognitive characteristics of patients with post-stroke cognition impairment (PSCI) on the basis of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised in China (WAIS-RC) and the individual contribution of the subtests to WAIS score. We included 227 patients with PSCI who were assessed using the WAIS-RC. We described the characteristics and score distribution of the scale and subtests individually and compared them with those of the normal group to measure the damage degree of these patients. We performed item response theory analysis to explore the best criterion score for all dimensions that allowed ideal discrimination and difficulty for reflecting cognitive level. Finally, we analyzed the contribution of each dimension to the overall cognitive function. Patients with PSCI showed worse cognition levels than healthy individuals in terms of overall intelligence quotient (73.26–100, −1.78 SD), with a difference of 4.54–7.96 points in each dimension (–0.68 to −1.82 SD), and a range of 5–7 points is the appropriate range for reflecting cognitive ability in patients with PSCI. The average cognitive level of patients with PSCI was significantly inferior to normal people (–1.78 SD, 96.25%). Vocabulary contributes most to WAIS score.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".