Severity of cognitive impairment at initial diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease was the strongest predictor of survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hypothesis that converting enzyme inhibition and a protein-restricted diet could have additive antiproteinuric effects has been tested. A group of 17 patients with proteinuria in excess of 3 g/24 h per 1.73 m2 of body surface area were submitted to a 3-wk period of study, after a 4-wk wash-out period during which protein intake was 1.0 g/kg per day and in the absence of any medication. During the first and second weeks of the study, protein intake was lowered to 0.3 g/kg per day, and in the third week, it returned to 1.0 g/kg per day. Enalapril (20 mg daily) was administered during the second and third weeks of the study. Initially and at the end of each week thereafter, we determined blood pressure, GFR (inulin clearance), RPF (para-aminohippurate clearance), plasma sodium and potassium, PRA and aldosterone, and the 24-h urine excretion of sodium potassium, protein, and urea. The low protein intake during the first week induced a significant fall of proteinuria (P < 0.01), GFR (P < 0.01), and RPF (P < 0.01) in the absence of changes in filtration fraction. The addition of enalapril induced a further decrease of proteinuria (P < 0.01) and a fall in filtration fraction (P < 0.05), whereas plasma potassium, PRA, GFR, and RPF values increased (P < 0.01). The rise in protein intake during the last week of the study induced a significant rise in proteinuria, GFR, and RPF (P < 0.01), although the first of these parameters attained values significantly lower (P < 0.05) than those observed initially.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".