MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2351779685

Clinical efficacy and safety of nicergoline combined with oxiracetam in the treatment of vascular cognitive impairment

2014· article· en· W2351779685 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhang Sheng-w

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Chinese Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCognitive impairmentClinical efficacyAdverse effectCognitionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitive Assessment SystemAnesthesiaInternal medicinePsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of nicergoline combined with oxiracetam in the treatment of vascular cognitive impairment(VCI).Methods One hundred and twenty-two subjects with VCI were randomly divided into nicergoline group(n = 38) with nicergoline 10 mg,tid po,oxiracetam group(n = 41) with oxiracetam 800 mg,tid po,and combined group(n = 43) with nicergoline plus oxiracetam of the same dose.After three-month treatment,the Mon-treal Cognitive Assessment(MoCA) and activities of daily living(ADL) scale were compared before and after the treatment to evaluate the improvement of cognitive and activities of daily living ability as well as the side effects of the two drugs.Results After 3-month treatment,MoCA score was significantly elevated(P 0.05) and ADL was significantly reduced in all of the three groups(P 0.05),and the changes in the combined group was much more obvious than those of the other two groups(P 0.05).No obvious side effects were observed in the periods of treatment in all the three groups.Conclusion Combined treatment was superior to either of the single regiment in the treatment of VCI without increasing the risk of developing side effects.

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)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.413
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

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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Chinese Journal of Clinical PharmacologySame topicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207