MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144769321 · doi:10.1159/000088494

Donepezil in Vascular Dementia: Combined Analysis of Two Large-Scale Clinical Trials

2005· article· en· W2144769321 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueDementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDonepezilPlaceboClinical Dementia RatingDementiaVascular dementiaAlzheimer's diseaseInternal medicineRandomizationPsychologyMedicineRandomized controlled trialMini–Mental State ExaminationDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There are currently no drugs approved to treat vascular dementia (VaD). The objective of this study was to determine if treatment with donepezil, an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor, may provide benefit for VaD patients. METHODS: Combined analysis of 2 identical randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 24-week studies involving 1,219 patients enrolled at 109 investigational sites in the USA, Europe, Canada and Australia. Patients were randomized to receive donepezil 5 mg/day (n = 406) or 10 mg/day (after brief titration; n = 421) or placebo (n = 392). Patients were assessed on cognition [Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE)], global function [Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change plus (CIBIC-plus), Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of the Boxes (CDR-SB)] and function [Alzheimer's Disease Functional Assessment and Change Scale (ADFACS); instrumental activities of daily living (ADFACS-IADL)]. RESULTS: Both donepezil groups showed significant improvements in cognition compared with placebo (ADAS-cog, MMSE, p < 0.01). Significant global function benefits were seen on the CIBIC-plus in the 5 mg/day group (placebo vs. 5 mg/day, p < 0.001; vs. 10 mg/day, p = 0.006) and on the CDR-SB in the 10 mg/day group (placebo vs. 5 mg/day, p = 0.09; vs. 10 mg/day, p < 0.01). Significant functional benefits were also seen (ADFACS, placebo vs. 5 mg/day, p = 0.08; vs. 10 mg/day, p = 0.02; ADFACS-IADL, p < 0.05 for both donepezil groups). Donepezil was well tolerated, with low withdrawal rates due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: This combined analysis of the largest trial on VaD to date showed that donepezil-treated patients had significant benefits in cognition, global function and ability to perform IADL. Based on these findings and reported tolerability, donepezil should be considered as an important therapeutic element in the overall management of patients with VaD.

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.363 · 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