Bibliographic record
Abstract
JAMA Ginkgo biloba for Prevention of Dementia: A Randomized Controlled Trial Steven T. DeKosky, MD; Jeff D. Williamson, MD, MHS; Annette L. Fitzpatrick, PhD; Richard A. Kronmal, PhD; Diane G. Ives, MPH; Judith A. Saxton, MD; Oscar L. Lopez, MD; Gregory Burke, MD; Michelle C. Carlson, PhD; Linda P. Fried, MD, MPH; Lewis H. Kuller, MD, DrPH; John A. Robbins, MD, MHS; Russell P. Tracy, PhD; Nancy F. Woolard; Leslie Dunn, MPH; Beth E. Snitz, PhD; Richard L. Nahin, PhD, MPH; Curt D. Furberg, MD, PhD; for the Ginkgo Evaluation of Memory (GEM) Study Investigators Context: Ginkgo bilobais widely used for its potential effects on memory and cognition. To date, adequately powered clinical trials testing the effect ofG bilobaon dementia incidence are lacking. Objective: To determine effectiveness ofG bilobavs placebo in reducing the incidence of all-cause dementia and Alzheimer disease (AD) in elderly individuals with normal cognition and those with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial conducted in 5 academic medical centers in the United States between 2000 and 2008 with a median follow-up of 6.1 years. Three thousand sixty-nine community volunteers aged 75 years or older with normal cognition (n = 2587) or MCI (n = 482) at study entry were assessed every 6 months for incident dementia. Intervention: Twice-daily dose of 120-mg extract ofG biloba(n = 1545) or placebo (n = 1524). Main Outcome Measures: Incident dementia and AD determined by expert panel consensus. Results: Five hundred twenty-three individuals developed dementia (246 receiving placebo and 277 receivingG biloba) with 92% of the dementia cases classified as possible or probable AD, or AD with evidence of vascular disease of the brain. Rates of dropout and loss to follow-up were low (6.3%), and the adverse effect profiles were similar for both groups. The overall dementia rate was 3.3 per 100 person-years in participants assigned toG bilobaand 2.9 per 100 person-years in the placebo group. The hazard ratio (HR) forG bilobacompared with placebo for all-cause dementia was 1.12 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-1.33;P = .21) and for AD, 1.16 (95% CI, 0.97-1.39;P = .11).G bilobaalso had no effect on the rate of progression to dementia in participants with MCI (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.85-1.50;P = .39). Conclusions: In this study,G bilobaat 120 mg twice a day was not effective in reducing either the overall incidence rate of dementia or AD incidence in elderly individuals with normal cognition or those with MCI. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier:NCT00010803 JAMA. 2008;300(19):2253-2262..
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".