MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

SEVEN YEARS FOLLOW-UP POST SUBARACHNOID HEMORRHAGE

2017· other· en· W6927325306 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library) · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGestational periodNucleofectionHyporeflexiaFusible alloyLiquationTSG101

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Impaired cognition, fatigue, depression and anxiety are consequences described after a subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), but long-term follow-ups are lacking. Aim: To investigate the long-term consequences among survivors seven years post SAH.Methods: In this explorative study, home-visits was carried out in a cohort of survivors with non-traumatic SAH in Gothenburg, Sweden. The forms and questionnaires used were Barthel Index (BI), modified Rankin Scale (mRS), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI).Results: Out of the 33 patients that fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 18 (55%) participated with a mean age of 65.5. Cognitive impairment was present in 11 participants, assessed with the MoCA, where the item of delayed recall was most difficult. The participants had high independency in ADL (BI). However, the number of participants free from disability according to the mRS was low (n=3). Nearly half of the participants had symptoms of anxiety (n=8) and experienced fatigue assessed with the MFI. Conclusion: Seven years post SAH, the majority of participants reported disability, such as cognitive impairment and anxiety. The hidden long-term consequences of SAH should be considered when planning the healthcare including follow-up as well as the rehabilitation. Keywords: Subarachnoid hemorrhage, follow-up studies, cognition

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0410.020
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0170.030
Open science0.0300.028
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0650.131

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.274 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library)French-language works237,207