MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949886072 · doi:10.2147/ndt.s179453

<p>The efficacy of a “cocktail therapy” on Parkinson’s disease with dementia</p>

2019· article· en· W2949886072 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chenhao Zhang, Yanjing Zang, Qin Song, Hongxuan Li, Lei Hu, Weidong Zhao, Shanshan Feng, Fang Gu, FengLi Zhao, Chunliang Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDementiaParkinson's diseaseDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To explore the efficacy and safety of “cocktail therapy” in Parkinson’s disease with dementia (PDD). Patients and methods: Sixty patients with PDD were randomly assigned to the test group (n=30) and a control group (n=30). The control group received 10 mg of donepezil hydrochloride tablets orally, once a day. The test group was treated with a “cocktail therapy”, which consisted of 10 mg of donepezil hydrochloride tablets taken orally, once a day; 200 mg of dl-3n-butylphthalide soft capsules taken orally, 15 mins before each meal, three times daily; 800 mg of oxiracetam capsules taken orally, three times daily; and 80 mg of Ginkgo biloba extract tablets taken orally, three times daily. Treatment was administered for six months. The Montreal cognitive assessment scale (MoCA), Blessed-Roth dementia scale, and Clinical Dementia Rating Scale sum of boxes (CDR-SB) were used before treatment and on the third and sixth month after treatment. Adverse events were also monitored. Results: There were no statistical differences in MoCA, CDR-SB, or Blessed-Roth dementia scale scores between the two groups before treatment. MoCA scores of the test group at six months were significantly higher than those before the treatment and at three months, while both the Blessed-Roth and CDR-SB scores were significantly lower than those before treatment and at three months ( p <0.05). Compared with the control group, MoCA scores of the test group were significantly higher, while both the Blessed-Roth and CDR-SB scores were significantly lower ( p <0.05), at six months after treatment. There was no statistical difference ( p >0.05) between the test group (16.67%) and the control group (13.33%) in the rate of abnormal liver function after treatment. Conclusion: Treatment with “cocktail therapy” was safe and improved the conditions of patients with PDD, as well as the quality of life of the patients. Keywords: cocktail therapy, Parkinson’s disease with dementia, efficacy, donepezil hydrochloride, cocktail therapy

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuropsychiatric Disease and TreatmentSame topicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207