Abstract 143: Social cognition impairments in patients with isolated cerebellar stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction/Purpose Recent studies point to an important role for the cerebellum in nonmotor functions, primarily including higher cognitive functions and affect. However, the available evidence on the cerebellar contribution to social cognitive faculties are currently sparse and the exact role of the cerebellum in social cognition is yet to be elucidated. The present study aimed to investigate the impairments in social cognition in a group of patients who suffered from isolated cerebellar stroke. We hypothesized that patients in earlier stages of their stroke and patients with posterior cerebellar lesions would be more affected in the social cognition domain than the rest of the group. Materials/Methods We tested 30 patients with isolated ischemic cerebellar stroke and 30 age, sex‐ and education‐matched healthy controls. Patients were classified according to the duration after stroke (acute, subacute and chronic) as well as the location of the cerebellar lesion. A cognitive battery primarily focusing on social cognition was performed and included Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test, Penn CNB Emotion Recognition Test, Faux Pas test, Tromso Social Intelligent Scale, The Social‐Emotional Expertise Scale and Geriatric Depression Scale. A thorough neurological examination was performed and Brief Ataxia Rating Scale was administered to assess ataxia symptoms specifically. The results were analyzed according to the timeline of ischemic insult and location of the lesions (e.g. anterior cerebellum, posterior cerebellum, right and left cerebellar hemispheres). Results Our results revealed a significant difference for the Penn Emotion Recognition Test pointing to significantly reduced anger recognition in the cerebellar stroke group compared to the healthy controls (p<0.05). The Faux‐Pas test revealed a significant impairment confined to the affective theory of mind section of the test (p<0.05). Data from the Reading the mind in the Eyes test did not reveal statistical significance between the cerebellar stroke and control groups (p>0.05). However, when analyzed for subgroups, the performance score was significantly lower in patients with left posterior cerebellar stroke (p=0.015). The scales and the MOCA test did not show significant differences among the patients and the healthy controls (p>0.05). Conclusion Our findings provide critical information regarding the cerebellar contributions on the social cognition network and expands the available evidence regarding the impairment in the social cognition following cerebellar stroke. Further research comprising more patients and detailed neuroimaging data will be able to illuminate the details of social cognition after cerebellar insult.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.005 | 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".