Clinical trial of nimodipine combine with butylphthalide in the treatment of patients with mild to moderate vascular cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of nimodipine combine with butylphthalide in the treatment of patients with mild to moderate vascular cognitive impairment(VCI). Methods From January 2012 to December 2016, 100 patients with mild to moderate VCI in Jinhua Municipal Central Hospital were randomly divided into control group(n=50) and treatment group(n=50) according to the random number table method.The control group received butylphthalide capsule, 200 mg po tid.The treatment group received nimodipine tablets, 40mg po tid, on the basis of the control group.The two groups of patients were treated for 24 weeks.Montreal cognitive assessment(MoCA), activities of daily living(ADL), serum hs-CRP, IL-6, TNF-α, clinical efficacy and adverse drug reactions were compared after treatment. Results After treatment, the scores of MoCA and ADL in the treatment group were (24.32±2.87)points, (59.22±6.17)points, respectively, which were significantly higher than those in the control group[(22.76±2.67)points, (55.63±6.3)points, t=2.814, 2.870, all P 0.05). Conclusion Nimodipine combined with butylphthalide in the treatment of mild to moderate VCI is effective and has high safety. Key words: Cognition disorders, vasculogenic; Drug therapy, combination; C-reaction protein; Interleukins 6; Tumor necrosis factorα; Comparative effectiveness research; Nimodipine; Butylphthalide
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".