A 12‐week open‐label pilot study of donepezil for cognitive functioning and instrumental activities of daily living in late‐life bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether donepezil is effective in enhancing cognitive functioning and instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) in older adults with bipolar disorder. METHODS: Twelve elderly patients with bipolar I or II disorder, with evidence of mild cognitive decrements, were administered donepezil 5-10 mg daily for 3 months. Participants had cognitive and functional evaluation pre-, on-, and 3-months post donepezil administration. RESULTS: Three subjects dropped out of the study. In the remaining nine subjects, no significant effects were observed in cognitive and functional measures. Seven of the nine participants asked to resume the medication after completion of the study because of the perceived beneficial effects. CONCLUSIONS: In this small pilot study of older adults with bipolar disorder, acute treatment with donepezil was not associated with improvements in cognitive and IADL functioning. Given limitations of the study design, placebo effects could not be ruled out in the subjects who asked to resume donepezil.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".