Effects of Bushen-Huoxue compound adjuvant therapy on mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson＆#39;s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate whether Bushen-Huoxue compound adjuvant therapy can be effective on mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson＇s disease and the influence on plasma phospholipids（PLs） levels. Methods 87 PD patients were recruited and collected for the general information. The patients were evaluated by Unified Parkinson＇s Disease Rating Scale（UPDRS） Ⅲ and Montreal Cognitive Assessment（MoCA）. According to MoCA scores, patients with PD-MCI were divided into a Bushen-Huoxue compound treatment group and a control group（basic L-dopa or dopamine agonist）. Reevaluating cognitive function by MoCA and plasma phopholipids levels at posttreatment 12 month and 18 month. Plasma PLs was assayed by measuring its inorganic phosphorus after separation by chromatograph.Results 39 cases in 87 PD patients（44.8%）were with PD-MCI.After 12 months or 18 months treatment period, MoCA scores was significantly higher in Bushen-Huoxue compound treatment group than in controls（P〈0.05 or 0.01 respectively）. Plasma PLs levels were significantly decreased in Bushen-Huoxue compound treatment group than in controls（P〈0.01 or 0.01 respectively）. Conclusions Bushen-Huoxue compound could be effective in the adjuvant treatment of PD-MCI, and could delay cognitive rate of decline in patients with PD. Meanwhile, Bushen-Huoxue compound could significantly decrease plasma PLs levels in PD-MCI. The evidence from present study suggested that Bushen-Huoxue compound have neuroprotective effects on patients with PD-MCI. Key words: Parkinson＆#39; s disease; Mild cognitive impairment; Phospholipids; Bushen-Huoxue compound
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".