Improvement of Apathy After Levofloxacin Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Apathy is common in various neurological conditions. A caregiver of a patient with normal pressure hydrocephalus and cognitive decline repeatedly reported improvement in apathy, social interaction, and ability to perform activities of daily living after treatment with levofloxacin for upper respiratory infections. We sought to determine whether this effect could be objectively supported and replicated outside the context of infection. METHODS: An n-of-1 study was performed using 2 treatment and 2 nontreatment phases during an infection-free interval. Treatment arms consisted of 10-day courses of levofloxacin 500 mg daily. The evaluating investigator, caregiver, and patient were blind to treatment assignments. Measures included the Apathy Evaluation Scale (clinician and caregiver), Apathy Inventory (clinician and caregiver), Northwestern University Disability Scale, Disability Assessment for Dementia, and caregiver clinical global impression score. RESULTS: The patient had less apathy and disability during 2 periods of treatment with levofloxacin 500 mg daily compared with periods without levofloxacin treatment. Caregiver clinical global impression scores were significantly better during days on treatment compared with off treatment (P=0.0007). CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of a single patient suggests that improvement in apathy may be a previously undescribed effect of levofloxacin. Further study is warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".