Cognitive dysfunction related to cerebral small vessel disease in young people with cerebral microbleeds as the main manifestation: two cases report and literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To analyze the clinical characteristics of 2 young patients with cerebral microhemorrhage as the main manifestation of cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD), and explore the relationship between the cerebral microhemorrhage and cognitive dysfunction. Methods and Results Both 2 patients were male, 39 years old, and had onset in their youth, diagnosed with cognitive dysfunction as the main complaint, all of them had a history of hypertension. The clinical manifestations were cognitive decline, including Case 1 with 28 score on Mini⁃Mental State Examination (MMSE) and 21 score on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). The MMSE of Case 2 was 26 score, the MoCA was 22 score, and Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR) was one score. Laboratory tests ruled out other causes of cognitive dysfunction. The imaging findings of the 2 patients were mainly cerebral microhemorrhage. Among them, the cerebral microhemorrhage of the patient in Case 1 was located in the cortex and subcortex, mainly distributed in the cortex. In Case 2, cerebral microhemorrhage was mainly located in the deep brain. No genetic variation was found to be associated or partially associated with the clinical phenotype. Finally, Case 1 was diagnosed with CSVD, and the possibility of amyloid cerebrovascular disease was high. Case 2 was diagnosed with vascular dementia (VaD) related to CSVD. Conclusions The number and location of cerebral microhemorrhage are closely related to cognitive dysfunction in young people, but the cause of cerebral microhemorrhage needs to be further clarified.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".