Clinical effects of the cerebellar fastigial nucleus electrical stimulation and oxiracetam for the treatment of vascular cognitive impairment without dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the clinical effects of the treatment of the cerebellar fastigial nucleus electrical stimulation(FNS) and oxiracetam for the treatment of vascular cognitive impairment not dementia(VCIND).Methods A total of 60 patients with VCIND were randomly divided into FNS group and oxiracetam group,each 30 cases.On the base of receiving conventional treatment in all groups,FNS was applied in the FNS group and the treatment of oxiracetam in the oxiracetam group.The event-related potentials P300(ERP-P300) and montreal cognitive assessment(MoCA) of all patients were observed and compared before and after the treatment.Results After the treatment,the scores of MoCA of the FNS group and the oxiracetam group had been improved(P0.01).The improvement of the scores of the FNS group was more obvious than that in the the oxiracetam group(P0.01).After the treatment,the P300 of the FNS group and the Oxiracetam group had been improved,the latency period of P300 was significantly shorten and the amplitude were significantly increased(P0.01).The improvement of the latency of P300 in the FNS group was more obvious than that in the Oxiracetam group(P0.01),but the improvement of the amplitude inthe oxiracetam group was more obvious than that in the FNS group(P0.01).Conclusions The FNS,oxiracetam can both improve the cognitive function of the patients with VCIND.The FNS can effectively improve executive function in patients with VCIND.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".