MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900637612 · doi:10.1097/jcp.0000000000000981

Lithium Carbonate in a Poststroke Population

2018· article· en· W2900637612 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Yue Sun, Nathan Herrmann, Christopher J.M. Scott, Sandra E. Black, Richard H. Swartz, Julia Hopyan, Krista L. Lanctôt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Psychopharmacology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsLithium carbonateVerbal memoryPopulationStroke (engine)MedicineLithium (medication)Magnetic resonance imagingPsychologyVerbal learningCognitionInternal medicinePsychiatryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: Loss of gray matter after stroke has been associated with cognitive impairment. This pilot study aimed to investigate the therapeutic potential of lithium, a putative neurotrophic agent, in the stroke recovery process within a year of stroke occurrence. METHODS: Twelve stroke patients (mean ± SD age, 71.1 ± 11.9 years) were recruited to the study, and eligible participants were prescribed open-label lithium for 60 days. Magnetic resonance imaging was used to assess global gray matter at baseline and end of treatment; global cognition was assessed using the standardized Mini-Mental State Examination and Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and verbal memory was evaluated using the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised. FINDINGS/RESULTS: There was no difference in global gray matter volume between baseline and follow-up (t = 1.977, P = 0.074). There was a significant interaction between higher lithium dose and increased global gray matter volume (F = 14.25, P = 0.004) and a correlation between higher lithium dose and improved verbal memory (r = 0.576, P = 0.05). IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS: Lithium pharmacotherapy may be associated with gray matter volume change and verbal memory improvement in stroke patients, providing a rationale for future trials assessing therapeutic potential of lithium in a poststroke population.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.473
Teacher spread0.423 · 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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical PsychopharmacologySame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207