MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Emerging Therapies for Vascular Dementia and Vascular Cognitive Impairment

2004· article· en· W2167597327 on OpenAlexaff
Timo Erkinjuntti, Gustavo C. Román, Serge Gauthier, Howard Feldman, Kenneth Rockwood

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDementiaDonepezilVascular dementiaGalantamineMemantineBasal forebrainCognitive declineStroke (engine)Alzheimer's diseaseRivastigmineInternal medicineCholinergicDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cerebrovascular disease (CVD) and ischemic brain injury secondary to cardiovascular disease are common causes of dementia and cognitive decline in the elderly. CVD also contributes to cognitive loss in Alzheimer disease (AD). SUMMARY: Progress in understanding vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) and vascular dementia (VaD) has resulted in promising symptomatic and preventive treatments. Cholinergic deficits in VaD due to ischemia of basal forebrain nuclei and cholinergic pathways can be treated with cholinesterase inhibitors used in AD. Controlled clinical trials with donepezil and galantamine in patients with VaD, as well as in patients with AD plus CVD, have demonstrated improvement in cognition, behavior, and activities of daily living. The N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist memantine stabilized progression of VaD compared with placebo. Primary and secondary stroke prevention, in particular with control of hypertension and hyperlipidemia, can decrease VaD incidence. CONCLUSIONS: From a public health viewpoint, recognition of VCI before the development of dementia and correction of vascular burden on the brain may lead to a global decrease of incident dementia.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations235
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207