Donepezil slows decline in daily life activities in people with moderate to severe Alzheimer’s disease and alleviates caregiver burden
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Feldman H, Gauthier S, Hecker J, et al. Efficacy of donepezil on maintenance of activities of daily living in patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer’s disease and the effect on caregiver burden. J Am Geriatr Soc 2003;51:737–44.[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] Q What are the effects of donepezil on activities of daily living, and social functioning in people with moderate to severe Alzheimer’s disease, and what are the effects on caregiver burden? ### ![Graphic][5] Design: Randomised controlled trial. ### ![Graphic][6] Allocation: Concealed. ### ![Graphic][7] Blinding: Double blind. ### ![Graphic][8] Follow up period: 24 weeks. ### ![Graphic][9] Setting: 32 centres in Canada (22), Australia (6) and France (4). ### ![Graphic][10] Patients: 290 people with moderate to severe Alzheimer’s disease (assessed using National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Strokes-Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Disorders Association criteria), with a committed caregiver, living in the community or in assisted living facilities. Participants had standardised Mini-Mental State Examination (sMMSE) scores of 5 to 17; mean age 73 years (donepezil group), and 74 years (placebo group). Exclusions: requiring 24 hour skilled nursing care; confinement to wheelchair; and taking medications with cholinomimetic or … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DJournal%2Bof%2Bthe%2BAmerican%2BGeriatrics%2BSociety%26rft.stitle%253DJ%2BAm%2BGeriatr%2BSoc%26rft.aulast%253DFeldman%26rft.auinit1%253DH.%26rft.volume%253D51%26rft.issue%253D6%26rft.spage%253D737%26rft.epage%253D744%26rft.atitle%253DEfficacy%2Bof%2Bdonepezil%2Bon%2Bmaintenance%2Bof%2Bactivities%2Bof%2Bdaily%2Bliving%2Bin%2Bpatients%2Bwith%2Bmoderate%2Bto%2Bsevere%2BAlzheimer%2527s%2Bdisease%2Band%2Bthe%2Beffect%2Bon%2Bcaregiver%2Bburden.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1046%252Fj.1365-2389.2003.51260.x%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F12757558%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1046/j.1365-2389.2003.51260.x&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=12757558&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmental%2F7%2F1%2F20.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000183049200001&link_type=ISI [5]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [6]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [7]: /embed/inline-graphic-3.gif [8]: /embed/inline-graphic-4.gif [9]: /embed/inline-graphic-5.gif [10]: /embed/inline-graphic-6.gif
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".