MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2098584496 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100005679

Clinical Trials in Parkinson's Disease Dementia and Dementia with Lewy Bodies

2007· review· en· W2098584496 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Richard Camicioli, Serge Gauthier

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreGlenrose Rehabilitation Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementia with Lewy bodiesDementiaRivastigmineClinical trialDonepezilMedicineLewy bodyQuetiapineDiseasePsychiatryPsychologyPathologySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parkinson's disease with dementia (PDD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) are pathological overlapping and important causes of dementia for which clinical trials are in their infancy. Cholinesterase inhibitors may be of benefit in DLB and PDD, as suggested by placebo-controlled clinical trials of rivastigmine and donepezil. The anti-psychotic agent clozapine has been of benefit in PD and PDD, but other agents, such as quetiapine, require adequate assessment. Barriers to trials include pathological overlap that can lead to inaccuracies in clinical diagnosis, unavailability of a consensus definition for PDD, unanswered questions regarding natural history and the paucity of validated outcome measures. Motor impairment must be considered in patients with PDD and DLB; conversely, cognitive impairment should be assessed in trials targeting motor impairment in advanced PD. Potential targets for treatment include onset of dementia, cognitive impairment, behavioral impairment, functional decline, falls, nursing home placement, mortality, quality of life and economic impact. Biomarkers including neuroimaging and cerebrospinal fluid markers are not currently established. At present PDD and DLB are distinct entities by definition. Future studies, including clinical trials and biomarker studies, will help to further define the clinical and therapeutic implications of this distinction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments→French-language works237,207→