Effect of hyperbaric oxygen therapy on cognitive function and serum Humanin level in patients with Alzheimer′s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the effect of hyperbaric oxygen (HBO) on cognitive function and serum Humanin expression in patients with Alzheimer′s disease (AD). Methods From June 2015 to June 2017, 72 patients with mild to moderate AD admitted to the Neurology of Taian Central Hospital were selected. The patients were divided into control group and HBO treatment group by random number table method, each group with 36 patients. The control group was given conventional treatments and HBO treatment group was treated with HBO based on the conventional treatments, both groups were treated for 2 months. Mini-mental state examination (MMSE) scores, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)scores and serum levels of Humanin in the two groups were compared before and after treatment. Results Before treatment, the MMSE score, MoCA score and serum Humanin level of the control group were (15.35±2.12) points, (17.08±2.73) points, (147.2±39.6) ng/L, respectively. The MMSE score, MoCA score and serum Humanin level in the HBO treatment group were (15.29±2.43) points, (17.16±2.61) points, (141.8±41.3) ng/L, respectively, there were no significant differences between the two groups (t=0.11, -0.13, 0.57, all P>0.05). After treatment, the MMSE score, MoCA score and serum Humanin level of the control group were (18.57±3.59)points, (20.46±3.07)points, (180.9±48.1)ng/L, which were lower than those in the HBO treatment group [(20.68±2.97)points, (22.74±3.28)points, (216.5±52.9)ng/L, respectively], the differences were significant (t=-2.72, -3.05, -2.99, all P<0.01). Serum Humanin level was positively correlated with MMSE score (r=0.628, P<0.05), and MoCA score (r=0.691, P<0.05). Conclusion Hyperbaric oxygen can improve the cognitive function of AD patients, and the mechanism may be related to the increased serum levels of Humanin. Key words: Alzheimer disease; Hyperbaric oxygen; Cognition; Humanin
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".