Impact of Ergenlongzhi Decoction on Transient Ischemic Attack in Patients with Cognitive Dysfunction Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To observe the impact of Ergenlongzhi Decoction on ischemic attack in patients with cognitive dysfunction treatment.Methods: 112 patients were randomly divided into the basis group with piracetam tablet,the control group with piracetam tablet and compound salvia tablets and the treatment group with piracetam and Ergenlongzhi Decoction.After 30 d,the cognitive functions were analysised with MoCA among these groups.Results: There were 5 patients missed in the treatment group,3 patients missed in the control group and 4 patients missed in the basis group.In the treatment group,the cognitive function and MoCA of patients after treatment were better significantly than those before treatment.Meanwhile,the CoMA scores in the treatment group were higher remarkably than those in the other groups(all P 0.05).Conclusion: It is better that the cognitive function and MoCA of patients with TIA treated with Ergenlongzhi Decoction.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".