Cognitive performance in patients with neuromyelitis optica: clinical and imaging characteristics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to identify the prevalence, clinical and radiographic characteristics, and risk factors for cognitive dysfunction in patients with Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD). Eighty-three participants who were diagnosed with NMOSD were recruited. Cognitive function was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB). The mean age of the patients was 47.78 ± 13.14 years, with an average of 12.05 ± 4.62 years of formal education. The majority (54%) exhibited cognitive impairment, defined by a MoCA score < 25 (mean: 22.96 ± 3.82). Disease severity (evaluated by the Expanded Disability Status Scale) and lower formal education levels were associated with cognitive impairment (p = 0.011 and < 0.001, respectively). The annualized relapse rate, disease duration, and AQP4 antibody status were not associated with cognitive impairment. Interestingly, informant-reported cognitive decline was associated with poorer cognitive performance (p = 0.027). Radiographic findings of lesion location and severity were associated with MoCA-assessed cognitive performance, particularly for lesions in the right parietal lobes (p = 0.023). Hippocampal atrophy was negatively correlated with FAB scores. In conclusion, approximately half of the Thai patients with NMOSD exhibited cognitive impairment, which was associated with age, formal education level, disease severity, relative perception, and specific radiological findings. Further studies incorporating comprehensive neuropsychological tests and subjective cognitive complaints are warranted.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".