Clinical Trial of Madopar HBS in Parkinsonian Patients with Fluctuating Drug Response after Long-Term Levodopa Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
23 parkinsonian patients, 11 men and 12 women with an average age of 62 +/- 10 years, were recruited for an open substitution study of standard Madopar by Madopar HBS (hydrodynamically balanced system). All patients were presenting fluctuations in efficacy associated or not with abnormal involuntary movements. The patients in this study had been suffering from Parkinson's disease for 16 +/- 6 years and were severely disabled (Hoehn and Yahr grade III-V). The substitution was carried out dose for dose from one day to another. During the first month the dosage titration was aimed at finding the optimal therapeutic effect. After 120 days 13 patients were continuing the treatment while 10 had stopped it because of lack of therapeutic advantage. After 120 days, as compared to the initial state, end-of-dose fluctuations improved by 47%, the parkinsonian symptomatology by 54% and the abnormal involuntary movements improved by 33%. The daily dose of Levodopa had to be increased from 580 +/- 230 to 710 +/- 240 mg. The results obtained were excellent in 5 cases, good in 6 and moderate in 2 cases.
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 | 0.000 | 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".