Monosialotetrahexosy lganglioside for vascular cognitive impsirment： an efficacy observation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To observe the efficacy of monosialotetrahexosyl~ngtioside （GM1） in the treatment of vascular cognitive impairment （VCI）. Methods Sixty patients with VCI were randomly divided into either a treatment group or a control group. The patients in the control group received conventional treatment and those in the treatment control group were treated with conventional treatment plus continuous intravenous infusion of GM1 （80 mg/d） for 2 weeks. The efficacy was evaluated by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment （MoCA） before and after the treatment, and the safety of the treatment was observed. Results After 2 weeks of treatment, the MoCA scores were significantly higher than those before treatment in both groups （all P 〈0. 05）. The MoCA scores of the treatment group were si~aificantly higher than those of the control goup （20. 82 ± 1.96 vs. 19. 61 ±2. 02, t=2. 315, P =0. 023）. No obvious adverse reactions were found. Conclusions The efficacy of GM1 is positive in the treatment of vascular cognitive impairment, and there is no obvious adverse reactions. It is worthy of using widely in clinical practice. Key words: Cogaition disorders; Cerebrovascular disorders; Gangliosides
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".