MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118598578 · doi:10.1177/1352458509355462

A randomized trial of memantine as treatment for spasticity in multiple sclerosis

2009· article· en· W2118598578 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lahar Mehta, Michael McDermott, Andrew Goodman, Steven R. Schwid

Bibliographic record

VenueMultiple Sclerosis Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistère de la Santé et des Services sociauxNational Multiple Sclerosis Society
KeywordsSpasticityMemantineModified Ashworth scaleMultiple sclerosisRandomized controlled trialMedicinePlaceboPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the results of a single center randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group trial of memantine in adults with multiple sclerosis and spasticity conducted over 12 weeks. Eligible MS patients had to have an Ashworth spasticity rating of 2 or higher in at least one lower extremity muscle group. Subjects were randomized to receive either placebo or memantine 10 mg twice a day. The primary outcome measure for efficacy was the change in Ashworth Spasticity Scale Score. Although well tolerated, memantine treatment did not demonstrate efficacy in treatment of spasticity in this 12-week small exploratory study.

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 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)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.156 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMultiple Sclerosis JournalSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207