Cognition, Function, and Caregiving Time Patterns in Patients With Mild-to-Moderate Alzheimer Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Placebo data were pooled from two 1-year, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of sabeluzole in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer disease (AD). Cognition was assessed using the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog) and activities of daily living (ADL) with the Disability Assessment in Dementia (DAD). Time spent assisting with ADL was estimated according to the caregiver for each DAD domain in the 2 weeks before assessment. Progressive annual decline was seen on ADAS-cog (5.6 +/- 7.3 [mean +/- SD]) and DAD (-12.4 +/- 17.8), with greater decline in moderate patients (Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] < or =18) than mild patients (MMSE >18). An MMSE score of 16 appeared to be a key transition point at which most instrumental ADL were lost and major losses of basic ADL began to occur over the next 12 months. Caregivers spent, on average, 14 hours more assisting with ADL over 2 weeks at the end of 1 year. The proportion of care provided by paid caregivers increased relative to the time spent by informal caregivers. Patients with mild-to-moderate AD experience predictable annual decline in cognition and daily functioning, with measurably increased caregiver time. Small changes in ADAS-cog are nevertheless associated with a substantial measurable effect on the daily lives of both patients and caregivers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".