Treatment of Hominis placenta pharmacopuncture for a patient with mild neurocognitive disorder: Case report
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hominis placenta pharmacopuncture, a treatment that injects Hominis placenta extract into acupoints, has been suggested in the literature and researches that it could be used for cognitive decline. We experienced a case of mild neurocognitive disorder treated with Hominis placenta pharmacopuncture. Hominis placenta pharmacopuncture could be a possible treatment modality producing substantial clinical result in cognitive function which is assessed with Mini-Mental State Examination-Dementia Screening (MMSE-DS), Korean Version of Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-K), and Korean-Dementia Rating Scale (K-DRS). A 84-year-old man with mild neurocognitive disorder received Hominis placenta pharmacopuncture on GV20, CV12, and bilateral ST36 for a month. The results of neuropsychological examination showed increase in scores after treatment of Hominis placenta pharmacopuncture. Before treatment, they were 15 points for MoCA-K, and 120 points for K-DRS (7.6%), but after treatment, they elevated by 21 points for MoCA-K and 137 points for K-DRS (100%). MMSE-DS score was 28 points, unchanged before and after treatment. It did not cause any side-effect. Hominis placenta pharmacopuncture could be a safe option for treating mild neurocognitive disorder.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it