MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2991325405 · doi:10.18999/nagjms.81.3.359

Cilostazol use is associated with FIM cognitive improvement during convalescent rehabilitation in patients with ischemic stroke: a retrospective study.

2019· article· en· W2991325405 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joe Senda, Keiichi Ito, T Kotake, Masahiko Kanamori, Hideo KISHIMOTO, Izumi Kadono, Hiroko Nakagawa‐Senda, Kenji Wakai, Masahisa Katsuno, Yoshihiro Nishida, Naoki Ishiguro, Gen Sobue

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCilostazolMedicineStroke (engine)RehabilitationInternal medicineFunctional Independence MeasureRetrospective cohort studyPhysical therapyMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCardiologyAnesthesiaCognitive impairmentDiseaseAspirin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cilostazol is a phosphodiesterase III-inhibiting antiplatelet agent that is often used to prevent stroke and peripheral artery disease, and its administration has shown significant improvements for cognitive impairment. We investigate the potential of cilostazol for reducing or restoring cognitive decline during convalescent rehabilitation in patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke. The study sample included 371 consecutive patients with lacunar (n = 44) and atherothrombosis (n = 327) subtypes of non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke (224 men and 147 women; mean age, 72.9 ± 8.1 years) who were required for inpatient convalescent rehabilitation. Their medical records were retrospectively surveyed to identify those who had received cilostazol (n = 101). Patients were grouped based on cilostazol condition, and Functional Independence Measure (FIM) scores (total and motor or cognitive subtest scores) were assessed both at admission and discharge. The gain and efficiency in FIM cognitive scores from admission to discharge were significantly higher in patients who received cilostazol than those who did not (p = 0.047 and p = 0.035, respectively); we found no significant differences in other clinical factors or scores. Multiple linear regression analysis confirmed that cilostazol was a significant factor in FIM cognitive scores at discharge (β = 0.041, B = 0.682, p = 0.045); the two tested dosages were not significantly different (100 mg/day, n = 43; 200 mg/day, n = 58). Cilostazol can potentially improve cognitive function during convalescent rehabilitation of patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke, although another research must be needed to confirm this potential.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases→French-language works237,207→