The Effect of Creatine and Coenzyme Q10 Combination Therapy on Mild Cognitive Impairment in Parkinson's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To investigate the effect of creatine and coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10) combination therapy on mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in Parkinson's disease (PD; PD-MCI) and its influences on plasma phospholipid (PL) levels in PD-MCI. METHODS: The demographic data of 75 PD-MCI patients who enrolled in this collaborative PD study were collected. These patients were evaluated using the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) III and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). These 75 PD-MCI patients were randomly treated with creatine monohydrate 5 g b.i.d. and CoQ10 100 mg t.i.d. orally or placebo. MoCA evaluation and PL level measurements were performed after 12 and 18 months of treatment. RESULTS: After 12 and 18 months of treatment, the differences in the MoCA scores of the combination therapy and control groups were statistically significant (p < 0.05 at 12 months and p < 0.01 at 18 months), and the plasma PL levels of the combination therapy group were significantly lower than those of the control group (p < 0.01 at 12 months and p < 0.001 at 18 months). CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy with creatine and CoQ10 could delay the decline of cognitive function in PD-MCI patients and could lower their plasma PL levels; therefore, this combination therapy may have a neuroprotective function.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".