Efficacy of acupuncture in combination with medicine for mild cognitive impairment after cerebral infarction:a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To observe the clinical effect of acupuncture in combination with medicine in the treatment of mild cognitive impairment after cerebral infarction as well as the impact on patients' daily living ability. Methods Seventy-two patients, in accordance with random number table, were divided into two groups, acupuncture combined with western medicine group(group A) and western medicine group(group B), each group with 36 patients. In combination with nimodipine tablets, acupuncture which can regulate the mind and reinforce the intelligence [making Bǎihui(百会 GV 20), Sishencōng(四神聪 EX-HN 1), Sibai(四白 ST 2), Fēngchi(风池 GB 20), Wangǔ(完骨 GB 12), Tiānzhu(天柱 BL 10), Shenmen(神门 HT 7), Neiguān(内关 PC 6), Shuǐgōu(水沟 GV 26), Sānyīnjiāo(三阴交 SP 6), Taichōng(太冲 LR 3), Fēnglong(丰隆 ST 40) as the main acupoints] was given in the treatment group(group A) while only nimodipine tablets were given in the control group(group B). The efficacy of these two groups was evaluated by Montreal Cognitive Assessment(Mo CA) Scale after the continuous treatment for three months. Results The remarkably effective rate was 69.4% and the total effective rate was 91.7% in the treatment group, while the remarkably effective rate was 55.6% and the total effective rate was 80.6% in the control group; the differences between the two groups were statistically significant(P0.05). When comparing the Mo CA score before and after treatment, which was 20.23±4.67 before treatment and 26.84±3.87 after treatment in group A; 19.82±3.56 before treatment and 23.33±2.78 after treatment in group B, it was found that the score for both groups became higher after treatment than that before treatment. Furthermore, the increase of the score was higher in the treatment group(6.61±0.80) than that in the control group(3.51±0.78) and the differences were statistically significant(P0.05). Conclusion Acupuncture, which can regulate the mind and reinforce the intelligence, combined with nimodipine tablets is an effective therapy for the treatment of mild cognitive impairment after cerebral infarction, which is superior to single treatment with nimodipine tablets.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.005 | 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".