MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202677862

Effect of Hominis Placenta Pharmacopuncture for a Patient with Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multi-Center Trial

2021· article· en· W3202677862 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yunna Kim, Yoon-Ji Eom, Kwon Do-Hyung, Lee Jae-Hyok, In-Chul Jung, Eun Cho, Ji-Eun Lee, Seung‐Hun Cho

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare and Venom Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlaceboMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMedicineMoodPlacebo-controlled studyQuality of life (healthcare)DementiaRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyAdverse effectInternal medicinePsychiatryCognitionCognitive impairmentDouble blind
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is condition of cognitive decline shown in transition from normal aging to dementia. Hominis placenta pharmacopuncture (HPP) is a treatment that combines effects of medication and acupuncture by injecting Hominis placenta into acupoints. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of HPP for MCI. Methods: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-center clinical trial. Eligible patients were randomly allocated to either the HPP group or the placebo group. HPP or saline as placebo was administered to participants for eight weeks. Changes in symptoms were observed. The primary outcome was difference in mean change of Korean Version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-K) score between the HPP group and the placebo group. Cognitive function, overall status of mood and sleep, and quality of life (QoL) were also assessed. Safety assessment and economic analysis were then conducted. Results: Thirty participants were enrolled. One participant in the placebo group dropped out. The score of MoCA-K increased after treatment. Its mean change was smaller in the HPP group than in the control group. HPP ameliorated Global Deterioration Scale and Korean Dementia Rating Scale subtests for attention, organization, and memory compared to the placebo. However, none of them was significantly different between the two groups. Mood, sleep, and QoL all improved more in the HPP group than in the placebo group, although differences between the two groups were not statistically significant. There was no adverse event probably related to the drug. HPP treatment needed KRW 345,000 more than the placebo group in improving Geriatric Quality of Life scale-Dementia score by one point for one year. Conclusions: Although HPP treatment did not significantly improve cognition, it changed behavioral and psychological symptoms in MCI.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.770

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.357 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHealthcare and Venom ResearchFrench-language works237,207