Treatment Effect of Donepezil is Greater in Moderate Stage Than in Mild Stage of Alzheimer's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a progressive disease with an insidious onset and a downhill course. Treatment response of cholinesterase inhibitors for AD seems to depend on severity degree but it is not clear which stage is more responsive. Methods: This was a 1 year, retrospective cohort study. AD patients (very mild, 188; mild, 153; moderate, 31) were recruited from the memory impairment clinic at Pusan National University Hospital of South Korea. Mean differences (score at the end of one-year follow up - score at baseline) in the Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes (CDRSOB) were used as the primary efficacy measures. Patients initially received 5 mg/day donepezil for first 1 month, then 10 mg/day for the remainder of the study. Results: Declining rates of the CDR 0.5 and the CDR 1 have higher declining rate in CDRSOB than the CDR 2 group. Conclusion: This study shows that the rate of cognitive decline is less in moderate AD than other stage of AD. This suggests that treatment effect of donepezil may be greater in moderate stage than in mild stage of AD. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4021/jnr178w
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".