MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032866687 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2012.05.278

P1‐003: Apathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial (ADMET): Preliminary efficacy report

2012· article· en· W2032866687 on OpenAlexaff
Jacobo Mintzer, Paul B. Rosenberg, Lea T. Drye, Roberta W. Scherer, Nathan Herrmann, Krista L. Lanctôt

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApathyMethylphenidateClinical Global ImpressionPsychologyPlaceboDementiaPsychiatryClinical trialMoodMedicineAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderInternal medicineDiseaseCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Apathy is a distinct syndrome affecting Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. Fifty percent of patients suffering from AD will present with apathy. The etiology of apathy in AD is unknown. Confluent information points to a potential association between dopaminergic disruption and apathy in AD. Preliminary data suggests that methylphenidate, a dopamine stimulant, may be effective on apathy in AD. The goal of ADMET was to explore the efficacy and safety of Methylphenidate in the treatment of apathy in AD. ADMET was a multi-site, 6 week, randomized placebo-controlled trial of the efficacy and safety of methylphenidate in mild-to-moderate AD. Patients with a major depressive episode (DSM-IV TR criteria) or psychotic symptoms were excluded. Cognition was assessed using the MMSE. Apathy and other behaviours were assessed using the Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES) and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). Efficacy was assessed as the change in score of the AES and the Alzheimer's disease Cooperative Study - Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) scale from baseline to 6 weeks. Secondary efficacy was assessed as the change in Digit Span from baseline to 6 weeks. In total, 60 patients were recruited (62% female, 92% Caucasian, mean (SD) age 76 ± 8 years, mean MMSE 20 ± 5). Subject retention was excellent. Only three participants dropped before week 6. Two of three did not return after baseline and one did not return after the week 2 visit. Recruited participants showed apathy on both the AES (51 ± 12), and NPI Apathy subscale (7.5 ± 2.3). Concomitant medications included cholinesterase inhibitors (72%), memantine (62%) and SSRIs (19%) and 13% of participants had a history of mood disorders. Preliminary results of the primary and secondary measures will be unveiled during this presentation. The treatment of apathy is a major clinical challenge for those treating AD. The results of this study will provide relevant information to clinicians managing this difficult group of patients.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207