MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005369376 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2007.07.006

Management of mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease and dementia

2007· article· en· W2005369376 on OpenAlexafffundabout
David B. Hogan, Peter Bailey, Anne Carswell, Barry Clarke, Carole Cohen, Dorothy Forbes, Malcolm Man‐Son‐Hing, Krista L. Lanctôt, Debra Morgan, Lilian Thorpe

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanWestern UniversityDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario Mental Health Foundation
KeywordsDementiaGrading (engineering)Primary careAlzheimer's diseaseDiseaseMedicineGerontologyPsychologyFamily medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors were charged with making a series of evidence-based recommendations that would provide concrete advice on all aspects of the management of mild to moderate stages of dementia and Alzheimer's disease (AD). The recommendations were primarily targeted to primary care physicians practicing in Canada. The assigned topic area did not include either the assessment of a patient with suspected dementia or the prevention of AD and other dementias. An extensive examination of the available literature was conducted. Explicit criteria for grading the strength of recommendations and the level of evidence supporting them were used. The 28 evidence-based recommendations agreed on are presented in this article.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations84
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207