MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051601876 · doi:10.1179/01610425017631

Treatment of vascular dementia—evidence from clinical trials with cholinesterase inhibitors

2004· review· en· W2051601876 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurological Research · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalantamineRivastigmineDonepezilBasal forebrainDementiaVascular dementiaCholinergicCholinesteraseMedicineDiseaseAlzheimer's diseaseCognitive declineCognitionNeuroscienceClinical trialInternal medicinePsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cerebrovascular disease (CVD), as well as secondary ischemic brain injury from cardiovascular disease, are common causes of dementia and cognitive decline in the elderly. Also, CVD frequently contributes to cognitive loss in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). Progress in understanding the pathogenetic mechanism involved in vascular cognitive impairment and vascular dementia (VaD) has resulted in promising treatments of these conditions. Cholinergic deficits in VaD are due to ischemia of basal forebrain nuclei and of cholinergic pathways and can be treated with the use of the cholinesterase inhibitors used in AD. Controlled clinical trials with donepezil, galantamine, and rivastigmine in VaD, as well as in patients with AD plus CVD, have demonstrated improvement in cognition, behavior and activities of daily living.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.695
GPT teacher head0.579
Teacher spread0.117 · 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