MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410240147 · doi:10.12775/jehs.2025.80.60095

Case Report Cognitive impairment in elderly population is not always a dementia

2025· article· en· W4410240147 on OpenAlexaff
Karolina Narejko, Martyna Niemczuk, M Lech, Sylwia Koziej, Agnieszka Kasiukiewicz, Zyta Beata Wojszel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education Health and Sport · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaCognitive impairmentMedicineGerontologyCognitionElderly peoplePopulationPediatricsPsychiatryEnvironmental healthInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION AND AIM Cognitive impairment is frequent disease in elderly people, prompting to the suspection of dementia. Considering the multi-disease nature and complexity of the treatment process for the geriatric population, it is crucial to exclude the several other disease processes and to actively search for causes of cognitive impairment, especially reversible conditions whose treatment can significantly improve cognitive function. DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE An 89-year-old man was admitted to the Geriatrics Unit due to progressive cognitive impairment and motor signs with the suspected dementia diagnosis. After a broad physical examination, laboratory tests and neuroimaging, the brain tumor was detected. The treatment included antiedematous drugs- Mannitol and Dexamethasone. The treatment resulted in an improvement of the contact with the patient and his general condition. CONCLUSION This clinical case demonstrates the relevance of searching for less common causes of cognitive impairment, as well as the necessity of careful investigation of concomitant coexisting symptoms, which can often lead us to the right diagnosis .

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)0.001
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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.495

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.379 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education Health and SportSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207