Clinical Modeling of Cognitive Decline with Sleep Disruption Markers in Stroke Rehabilitation Units
Keywords:
Stroke Rehabilitation, Cognitive Decline, Sleep Disruption, Clinical Modeling, NeuroplasticityAbstract
Stroke remains one of the leading causes of long-term disability worldwide, with cognitive decline representing a critical barrier to functional recovery. Recent clinical evidence suggests that sleep architecture is fundamentally linked to neuroplasticity and cognitive preservation, yet sleep disruption remains pervasive within acute and subacute stroke rehabilitation units. This paper provides a comprehensive academic analysis of how sleep disruption markers can be utilized within clinical modeling frameworks to assess and predict cognitive decline in post-stroke populations. By systematically evaluating physiological, environmental, and behavioral sleep fragmentation indicators, the study demonstrates the feasibility of integrating continuous sleep monitoring data into predictive clinical care models. The research evaluates various sleep parameters, including wake after sleep onset, total sleep time, and sleep efficiency, to determine their correlation with specific domains of cognitive impairment such as executive function, memory consolidation, and processing speed. Furthermore, the analysis emphasizes the development of robust predictive models that leverage these markers to provide early warning systems for cognitive deterioration during the rehabilitation phase. The findings advocate for the inclusion of sleep hygiene optimization and continuous non-invasive sleep monitoring as standard protocols within stroke rehabilitation units, ultimately aiming to enhance neurocognitive outcomes and improve the overall trajectory of stroke recovery.References
1. Abduljalil, K.; Gardner, I.; Jamei, M. Application of Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Model to Delineate the Impact of Aging and Renal Impairment on Ceftazidime Clearance. Antibiotics 2024, 13, 862.
2. Saeedi, M.; Eslamifar, M.; Khezri, K.; Dizaj, S.M. Applications of nanotechnology in drug delivery to the central nervous system. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2019, 111, 666–675.
3. Otáhal, M.; Mlček, M.; Borges, J.B.; Alcala, G.C.; Hladík, D.; Kuriščák, E.; Tejkl, L.; Amato, M.; Kittnar, O. Prone positioning may increase lung overdistension in COVID-19-induced ARDS. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 16528. [ Central]
4. Putensen, C.; Hentze, B.; Muenster, S.; Muders, T. Electrical Impedance Tomography for Cardio-Pulmonary Monitoring. J. Clin. Med. 2019, 8, 1176.
5. Gonnabathula, P.; Li, M.; Nagumalli, S.K.; Mehta, D.; Fairman, K. Applications of PBPK Modeling to Estimate Drug Metabolism and Related ADME Processes in Specific Populations. Pharmaceutics 2025, 17, 1207.
6. Open Systems Pharmacology. Creating Populations. PK-Sim Documentation.
2025. Available online: https://docs.open-systems-pharmacology.org/working-with-pk-sim/pk-sim-documentation/pk-sim-creating-populations (accessed on 2 February 2026).
7. Steinmann, D.; Stahl, C.A.; Minner, J.; Schumann, S.; Loop, T.; Kirschbaum, A.; Priebe, H.J.; Guttmann, J. Electrical impedance tomography to confirm correct placement of double-lumen tube: A feasibility study. Br. J. Anaesth. 2008, 101, 411–418.
8. Sang, L.; Zhao, Z.; Yun, P.J.; Frerichs, I.; Möller, K.; Fu, F.; Liu, X.; Zhong, N.; Li, Y. Qualitative and quantitative assessment of pendelluft: A simple method based on electrical impedance tomography. Ann. Transl. Med. 2020, 8, 1216.
9. Domínguez-Romero, E.; Mazurenko, S.; Scheringer, M.; Martins dos Santos, V.A.P.; Evelo, C.T.; Anton, M.; Hancock, J.M.; Županič, A.; Suarez-Diez, M. Making PBPK models more reproducible in practice. Brief. Bioinform. 2024, 25, bbae569.
10. Brown, R.P.; Delp, M.D.; Lindstedt, S.L.; Rhomberg, L.R.; Beliles, R.P. Physiological parameter values for physiologically based pharmacokinetic models. Toxicol. Ind. Health 1997, 13, 407–484.
11. Abouir, K.; Samer, C.F.; Gloor, Y.; Desmeules, J.A.; Daali, Y. Reviewing Data Integrated for PBPK Model Development to Predict Metabolic Drug-Drug Interactions: Shifting Perspectives and Emerging Trends. Front. Pharmacol. 2021, 12, 708299.
12. Khalil, F.; Läer, S. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling: Methodology, applications, and limitations with a focus on its role in pediatric drug development. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2011, 2011, 907461.
13. Yang, R.S.H. Appendix C PBPK Modeling. In Human Biomonitoring for Environmental Chemicals; National Research Council, Ed.; The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2006; pp. 278–292.
14. Yang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Zeng, W.; Zhou, J.; Xu, M.; Lan, Y.; Liu, L.; Shen, J.; Zhang, C.; He, Q. Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling of meropenem in critically ill patients. Sci. Rep. 2024, 14, 19269.
15. Borges, J.B.; Suarez-Sipmann, F.; Bohm, S.H.; Tusman, G.; Melo, A.; Maripuu, E.; Sandström, M.; Park, M.; Costa, E.L.; Hedenstierna, G.; et al. Regional lung perfusion estimated by electrical impedance tomography in a piglet model of lung collapse. J. Appl. Physiol. 2012, 112, 225–236.
16. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Uncertainty and Variability in Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Models: Key Issues and Case Studies; EPA/600/R-08/090; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development: Washington, DC, USA, 2008.
17. Kuepfer, L.; Niederalt, C.; Wendl, T.; Schlender, J.F.; Willmann, S.; Lippert, J.; Block, M.; Eissing, T.; Teutonico, D. Applied Concepts in PBPK Modeling: How to Build a PBPK/PD Model. CPT Pharmacomet. Syst. Pharmacol. 2016, 5, 516–531.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Articles are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), unless otherwise stated.
