Real-world effectiveness, its predictors and onset of action of cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine in dementia: retrospective health record study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The efficacy of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and memantine in the symptomatic treatment of Alzheimer's disease is well-established. Randomised trials have shown them to be associated with a reduction in the rate of cognitive decline. AIMS: To investigate the real-world effectiveness of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and memantine for dementia-causing diseases in the largest UK observational secondary care service data-set to date. METHOD: We extracted mentions of relevant medications and cognitive testing (Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores) from de-identified patient records from two National Health Service (NHS) trusts. The 10-year changes in cognitive performance were modelled using a combination of generalised additive and linear mixed-effects modelling. RESULTS: The initial decline in MMSE and MoCA scores occurs approximately 2 years before medication is initiated. Medication prescription stabilises cognitive performance for the ensuing 2-5 months. The effect is boosted in more cognitively impaired cases at the point of medication prescription and attenuated in those taking antipsychotics. Importantly, patients who are switched between agents at least once do not experience any beneficial cognitive effect from pharmacological treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents one of the largest real-world examination of the efficacy of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and memantine for symptomatic treatment of dementia. We found evidence that 68% of individuals respond to treatment with a period of cognitive stabilisation before continuing their decline at the pre-treatment rate.
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 | 0.008 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".