The possibility of using combination therapy in patients with chronic cerebral ischemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of mexiB 6 and vinpotropil 10/800 in patients with chronic cerebral ischemia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study included 30 outpatients with chronic cerebral ischemia, 1-2 stages. The average age was 55,2±10,04 years. All patients underwent clinical/neurological examination. To assess the efficacy of therapy, the Visual-Analog Scale, the Test of feeling, activity and mood, the Montreal Cognitive Evaluation Scale, the Asthenia Scale, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale were used. All patients were treated with mexicB 6 (1 tablet 3 times a day for 1 month), then vinpotropil 10/800 (1 tablet 3 times a day) was used in addition to mexiB 6. The total duration of follow-up was 2 months. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Treatment with mexiB 6 led to a significant regression of patients' complaints starting from the second week of therapy, the improvement in well-being was noted in all patients. Inclusion of vinpotropil in the therapy resulted in the additional symptom regression in 19 (63,3%) patients. At the end of combined therapy, there was a significant improvement on all the scales that indicated improvements in cognitive functions, asthenic and anxiety-depressive disorders. An increase in Mg in the blood (0,91±0,05 mmol/l), which did not change after 2 months of therapy (0,94±0,05 mmol/l) was observed. Undesirable phenomena during treatment were not recorded. MexiB 6 and vinpotropil were well-tolerated in both monotherapy and combined use. The proposed therapy scheme is effective and safe.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".