Correlation between brain magnetic resonance imaging, cognitive dysfunction and physical dysability in multiple sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Montreal Cognitive Assessment test (MoCA) is a brief, sensitive test that has been recommended as a reliable tool to detect mild cognitive impairment. Associations between brain imaging measures and cognitive functioning have been observed in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). To evaluate cognitive dysfunction and physical disability in MS patients by making correlation between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), MoCA test, and Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Fifty MS patients and 25 controls underwent clinical evaluation and assessment of cognitive functions using the MoCA test. In addition, all MS patients underwent conventional MRI brain and Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). The scores for trail making test, memory, attention, serial seven subtractions, fluency, naming, and orientation in MS patients were significantly different from control (p < 0.05). There was significant inverse correlation between number of MS plaques in the temporal lobe and abstraction (p < 0.001, r = − 0.52). Less inverse correlation was found between total number of MRI plaques and concentration, total number of MRI plaques and abstraction, and infratentorial lesions and clock drawing test. No correlations were found between the number of MS plaques in frontal, parietal, occipital, corpus callosum, and neuropsychological tests. Although conventional MRI techniques are crucial in the MS diagnostic workup, their accuracy in evaluating and predicting cognitive dysfunction is less relevant. The MoCA test would provide a brief screen for cognitive dysfunction in MS.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".