EXACT: rivastigmine improves the high prevalence of attention deficits and mood and behaviour symptoms in Alzheimer's disease*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of rivastigmine therapy on attention, apathy, anxiety and agitation in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD) in a real-world clinical setting. Patients with mild-to-moderate AD were enrolled in the study by physicians across Canada. They were treated with open-label rivastigmine (dose at the discretion of the prescribing physicians) for a period of 6 months. Changes from baseline in attention, apathy, anxiety and agitation were assessed using an abbreviated Clinician's Global Impression of Change at 3- and 6-month visits. The Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) was also used at these visits. Use and changes in use of psychotropic medications were recorded, as were changes in caregiver burden. Analyses of subgroups (outpatients vs. institutionalised patients) were also performed. A total of 2119 patients were enrolled in the study by 375 physicians. At baseline, 91% had deficits in attention, 85.4% had symptoms of anxiety, 78.5% exhibited apathy and 70.1% showed agitation. At 6 months, 67.5% of evaluable patients had improved on the symptom of attention, while 62.3%, 62.6% and 56.0% had improvements in anxiety, apathy and agitation respectively. The percentages with improvements were higher in the institutional subgroup than among outpatients. There was an overall mean improvement of 1.1 points on the MMSE at 6 months. Approximately four times as many caregivers reported a reduced burden than an increased burden at 6 months (40.3% vs. 10.3%). The majority of patients treated with rivastigmine experienced improvements in attention, anxiety, apathy and agitation. These real-life findings further demonstrate the proven efficacy of rivastigmine in patients with mild-to-moderate AD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".