[F4–08–02]: WHAT's IT LIKE TO RUN A PHASE III TRIAL FOR VCID? THE SPS3
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stroke and hypertension are risk factors for dementia. Data from clinical trials that tested lowering blood pressure and antiplatelet agents to reduce dementia in stroke patients have been inconsistent. The Secondary Prevention of Small Subcortical Strokes (SPS3) trial (NCT00059306) tested two interventions for prevention of stroke in patients with recent lacunar strokes: single (aspirin) vs dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin + clopidogrel) and lower (<130 mmHg) vs. higher (130–149 mmHg) systolic blood pressure (SBP) targets. The secondary outcome was a change in cognitive function over time measured by the CASI test. The neuropsychological test battery for SPS3 included 10 tests and it was administered at baseline and annually. The study was conducted in 8 countries, 2916 participants (mean age 63 years) with CASI scores at entry were included in the analysis. Changes in CASI Z scores over time (median follow-up of 3.0 years) did not differ between antiplatelet groups (p=0.858) or blood pressure targets (p=0.520). The incidence of MCI was not different by treatment group for antiplatelet agents: 9.7% in the aspirin+clopidogrel group vs 9.9% in aspirin group (p=0.704). Similarly, MCI incidence did not differ between patients allocated to the lower SBP vs higher SBP target (10% vs 9.5% respecively, p=0.555). Cognitive function was not changed by these interventions in patients with lacunar strokes. Studies of cognitive function post-stroke should be of longer duration and in populations at high risk of cognitive decline.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.004 |
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".