Glycopyrrolate Improves Disability From Sialorrhea in Parkinson's Disease: A <scp>12‐Week</scp> Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the 12-week efficacy and safety of oral glycopyrrolate for moderate-to-severe sialorrhea in Parkinson's disease (PD). BACKGROUND: Chronic moderate-to-severe sialorrhea has a negative impact on quality of life in PD. There is no robust evidence for oral treatments for sialorrhea longer than 1 week. METHODS: This was a 12-week, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel phase II study in patients with PD and Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale item 2.2 > 2. The intervention was glycopyrrolate up to 4.5 mg/d; the primary outcome was sialorrhea related-disability (Radboud Oral Motor Inventory for Parkinson's Disease-Saliva). We used an intention-to-treat analysis. A P < 0.05 was deemed significant. RESULTS: We recruited 28 patients (age, 71.1 ± 6.9 years; PD duration, 11.4 ± 7.2 years; Radboud Oral Motor Inventory for Parkinson's Disease-Saliva, 22.4 ± 5.7). Glycopyrrolate was superior to placebo at 12 weeks in the Radboud Oral Motor Inventory for Parkinson's Disease-Saliva (between-group difference, 5.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-9.6). Dry mouth was the most common adverse event (glycopyrrolate, n = 6; placebo, n = 2). CONCLUSIONS: The results support the efficacy of glycopyrrolate to treat sialorrhea-related disability up to 12 weeks and contribute to addressing unmet nonmotor care needs in PD. © 2020 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".