MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398767744 · doi:10.1093/europace/euae102.053

Assessment of mild cognitive dysfunction in patients with atrial fibrillation utilizing the R4Alz assessment test

2024· article· en· W4398767744 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maria Toumpourleka, Magdalini Meletidou, D Tachmatzidis, Konstantinos Triantafyllou, A. Antoniadis, C Bakogiannis, Γεώργιος Γιαννόπουλος, Vasileios Vassilikos

Bibliographic record

VenueEP Europace · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationCardiologyInternal medicineTest (biology)CognitionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background/Introduction The association between atrial fibrillation and cognitive dysfunction has accumulated a growing body of evidence in recent years. However, establishing such a diagnosis remains challenging, especially in mild oligosymptomatic patients. REMEDES for Alzheimer (R4Alz) is a novel test, designed to assess cognitive control decline at an early stage. Purpose We sought to evaluate the prevalence of early, mild cognitive dysfunction in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation with the use of established and novel diagnostic tools. Methods This is a prospective cross-sectional study that enrolled consecutive patients with history of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and matched healthy controls, from a tertiary cardiology department. Patients with history of stroke or known cognitive dysfunction of any type were excluded from the study. Demographic and clinical data were collected. All study participants were subjected to Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and to R4Alz within the same day. Cognitive function and attention ability is assessed at three stages with R4Alz: working memory updating (R1), supervisory attention system (R2) and task/rule switching and control of inhibition (R3). The primary endpoint was the difference in cognitive function between patients with atrial fibrillation and controls. Secondary endpoints included the correlation between the two assessment tests in both groups. Statistical analysis was performed with R version 4.1.0 and a p-value<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Fifty-five patients with atrial fibrillation and thirty-four controls were enrolled in the study (Mean age: 62.6 y, Female gender: 62.9%). MoCA scores (25.4 ± 4.11 for patients with atrial fibrillation vs 22.3 ± 3.72 for healthy controls, p-value <0.001) (Figure 1) as well as scores of all stages of R4ALz {working memory (R1a, R1b, R1c), supervisory attention system (R2) and task/rule switching – inhibition control (R3a1, R3a2, R3b)} were indicative of mild cognitive dysfunction in patients with atrial fibrillation. The control group exhibited significantly better cognitive performance on all assessment tools (Table 1).Figure 1Table 1

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueEP EuropaceSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207