#2258 Cognitive impairment and associated factors in patients undergoing hemodialysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background and Aims Cognitive impairment is highly prevalent among patients undergoing hemodialysis, and its origin appears to be multifactorial. The aim of this study is to evaluate the prevalence of cognitive impairment in patients from our Hemodialysis Unit and identify the factors associated with it. Method A cross-sectional study was conducted on patients undergoing hemodialysis, excluding those with a confirmed diagnosis of dementia. Cognitive impairment was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) test. Clinical history data were collected, the meaning of various laboratory parameters over the past year was determined, and the presence of sarcopenia was evaluated by analyzing muscle mass through bioimpedance and strength through dynamometry. Statistical analysis was performed using parametric tests, with statistical significance set at P < 0.05. Results A total of 52 patients were included in the study, with a cognitive impairment prevalence of 63.5%. The most relevant results are shown in the Table 1. Age (r = −0.480; P < 0.001) and months on hemodialysis (r = −0.402; P = 0.004) were negatively correlated with the MOCA test, indicating an increase in cognitive impairment with advancing age and longer duration on hemodialysis. Conclusion Cognitive impairment is highly prevalent among patients undergoing hemodialysis. In our study, sarcopenia was not associated with cognitive impairment. However, patients with cognitive impairment exhibited lower phosphorus levels. Additionally, their weight tended to be lower, which may suggest that nutritional and metabolic factors could influence this condition. Clearly, age, duration of hemodialysis, and a history of cardiovascular disease were associated with cognitive impairment. Interventions aimed at improving dialysis techniques and preventing vascular disease could be beneficial in mitigating this condition.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".