The Association Between Oxygen Saturation Levels and Cognitive Decline in Patients with Cardiovascular Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment is most commonly associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD), and chronic hypoxia, which is extremely prevalent in CVD patients, is speculated to be an etiologic factor of impairment. Reduced peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO₂) was found to enhance cognitive impairments, particularly Alzheimer's disease (AD) and vascular dementia (VD). This study seeks To determine the correlation between oxygen saturation and cognitive function of patients with cardiovascular disorder as an effort to determine if or not hypoxia is the underlying cause of cognitive impairment. METHOD: Cross-sectional analysis was conducted on 120 patients of CVD in a tertiary care hospital. SpO₂ was measured through pulse oximetry and cognitive function was evaluated with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). The patients were divided into two groups based on SpO₂ values: normal (≥95%) and decreased (<95%). Statistical comparison was conducted to examine the relationship between MoCA and SpO₂ scores. RESULT: Those patients with low SpO₂ levels had reduced MoCA scores (mean 21.4 ± 3.2) compared to those patients with normal SpO₂ levels (mean 25.8 ± 2.7; p < 0.01). There was a moderate positive relationship between SpO₂ and MoCA scores (r = 0.49), indicating that decreased oxygen saturation is associated with increased cognitive impairment. CONCLUSION: The findings above show that reduced oxygen saturation can be a significant etiology of cognitive impairment in CVD patients, and this necessitates close monitoring of oxygen and immediate cognitive evaluation in CVD patients. More research is needed to explore the potential therapeutic benefit of increased oxygenation in avoiding or postponing cognitive impairment in CVD patients.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".