Perbedaan kadar asam urat antara fungsi kognitif normal da demensia pada lansia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Latar Belakang dan Tujuan : Lansia merupakan kelompok resiko tinggi untuk terjadinya gangguan kognitif. Asam urat merupakan antioksidan yang bersifat neuroprokteksi pada fungsi kognitif. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui adanya perbedaan kadar asam urat pada pasien dengan fungsi kognitif normal dan demensia pada lansia. Sehingga dapat membuktikan bahwa asam urat merupakan suatu antioksidan dalam tubuh manusia yang bisa menangkap radikal bebas yang dapat mempengaruhi fungsi kognitif. Metode : Subjek penelitian ini adalah usia lanjut yang memenuhi kreateria inklusi dan eksklusi di Posyandu Lansia Kecamatan Mijen Kota Semarang pada bulan November 2014. Dilakukan pemeriksaan asam urat dan fungsi kognitif dinilai menggunakan Montreal Cognitive Assasment (MoCA) versi Indonesia secara bersamaan pada subjek. Fungsi kognitif normal apabila hasil MoCa-Ina ≥26, MoCA-Ina <26 dikatakan demensia. Data dianalisis menggunakan uji T Independent. Perbedaan dinyatakan bermakna bila nilai p<0,05. Hasil : Didapatkan 25 (52,08%) subjek dengan fungsi kognitif normal, sedangkan 23 (47,91%) subjek mengalami demensia. Mean kadar asam urat pada subjek dengan fungsi kognitif normal adalah 5,08 (SD=0,786) mg/dL, sedangkan pada subjek dementia mean kadar asam urat adalah sebesar 5,82 (SD=1,342) mg/dL. Didapatkan perbedaan bermakna antara kadar asam urat fungsi kognitif normal dan demensia, (t= -2,324, p 0,026). Kesimpulan : Terdapat perbedaan bermakna antara kadar asam urat fungsi kognitif normal dan demensia, dengan rerata kadar asam urat lebih tinggi pada demensia. \nKata Kunci :Fungsi kognitif, MoCA-Ina, kadar asam urat \n
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.004 |
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".