Activities of Daily Living in Moderate-to-Severe Alzheimer Disease: An Analysis of the Treatment Effects of Memantine in Patients Receiving Stable Donepezil Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In moderate-to-severe Alzheimer disease (AD), there are significant losses of activities of daily living (ADL). In a recent prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, memantine treatment lessened the overall functional decline in AD patients already on stable donepezil therapy. In this trial, patients (n=404) with Mini-Mental State Examination scores of 5 to 14 receiving stable donepezil treatment were randomized to double-blind treatment with memantine (10 mg b.i.d.; n=203) or placebo (n=201). A primary outcome measure was the 19-item Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study--Activities of Daily Living Inventory (ADCS-ADL(19)). To further evaluate the treatment effects of memantine on function, we performed post hoc analyses of ADCS-ADL(19) data from this trial, including ADL items and new subscales derived from factor analysis. Using mixed model analyses, patients receiving memantine had statistically significant less decline in total ADCS-ADL(19) scores compared with placebo. An item analysis revealed statistically significant benefits of memantine on grooming, toileting, conversing, watching television, and being left alone. Statistically significant improvements were noted in subscales evaluating higher-level functions and connectedness/autonomy with memantine compared with placebo. These post hoc analyses in moderate-to-severe AD patients receiving stable donepezil treatment suggest that memantine may impact overall functional levels, and some of the cognitive processing underlying ADL performance.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".