Memory Enhancement from Two Weeks’ Exposure to North American Ginseng Extract HT1001 in Young and Middle Aged Healthy Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In vivo, in vitro, and animal learning studies have reported neuroactive effects of Rb1 and Rg1 ginsenosides that may be relevant to human learning and memory.The objective of this study was to assess potential learning and memory benefits of HT1001, a standardized proprietary North American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius) extract containing Rb1, Rg1 and other important ginsenosides, in healthy volunteers.Neuropsychological assessments were conducted using the Clinical Memory Scale (CMS), which has two parallel forms for baseline and post-treatment assessments.A young adult sample (YAS, n = 10) and a middle aged sample (MAS, n = 10) completed the CMS at baseline and again after 14 days' exposure to 200mg HT1001 daily.The CMS Memory Quotient (MQ) showed significant main effects of time, with higher CMS-MQ on the second assessment compared to the first, and of age group, with the YAS performing better than the MAS.There was no interaction between time and age group.Secondary analyses indicated benefits for both groups on free recall of word lists, cued recall of word pairs, and recognition of figures, and benefits in the YAS but not the MAS on free recall of pictures.Taken together, the results suggest that memory, as measured with the CMS-MQ, was significantly improved with open-label HT1001.While practise effects cannot be completely ruled out, the results presented here are exciting and timely given our increasingly ageing population, and provide preliminary support for a prospective placebo-controlled examination of HT1001 on learning and memory.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".