MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2195733756 · doi:10.4088/jcp.14r09237

Cholinesterase Inhibitor Discontinuation in Patients With Alzheimer’s Disease

2015· review· en· W2195733756 on OpenAlexaff
Jordana O'Regan, Krista L. Lanctôt, Graham Mazereeuw, Nathan Herrmann

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Clinical Psychiatry · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscontinuationCholinesteraseMedicineDiseaseAlzheimer's diseasePsychologyPharmacologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis examined the effects of cholinesterase inhibitor (ChEI) discontinuation in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). DATA SOURCES: Electronic records up to March 2014 were searched from MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. Search terms included Alzheimer's disease and cholinesterase inhibitors, plus discontinuation or cessation or tapering or withdrawal. There were no language limits. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies investigating the effect of ChEI discontinuation on patients with AD according to standardized criteria (eg, National Institute of Neurologic and Communicative Disorders and Stroke/Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association, DSM-IV) and presenting measurable results of neuropsychological testing were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Demographics, setting, ChEI treatment length, discontinuation protocol, follow-up duration, study outcomes, and dropouts during the double-blind phase were extracted. RESULTS: Of 1,430 records returned, 18 were reviewed. Five ChEI discontinuation randomized controlled trials (N = 321 continued and N = 332 discontinued, following patients for 1.5-24 months) were analyzed. Discontinued patients demonstrated a significant worsening of cognition (standard mean Mini-Mental State Examination difference: -0.29 [95% CI, -0.45 to -0.13], N = 300 continued/307 discontinued, P < .001), a significant worsening of neuropsychiatric symptoms (standard mean Neuropsychiatric Inventory difference: -0.32 [-0.51 to -0.12], N = 199/211, P = .001), and significantly higher dropout rates (risk ratio [RR] = 1.33 [1.11-1.59], N = 321/332, P = .002) compared to those who continued. No difference in adverse events was observed (RR = 1.01 [0.85-1.20], N = 314/326, P = .92). CONCLUSIONS: ChEI discontinuation may have negative effects on cognition and neuropsychiatric symptoms, a finding corroborated by a higher incidence of trial dropout.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.661
Threshold uncertainty score0.643

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.361 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations63
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Clinical PsychiatrySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207