Use of medium chain triglyceride (MCT) oil in subjects with Alzheimer's disease: A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, crossover study, with an open‐label extension
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Cerebral glucose and insulin metabolism is impaired in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Ketones provide alternative energy. Will medium chain triglyceride (MCT) oil, a nutritional source of ketones, impact cognition in AD? Methods This was a 6‐month randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, crossover study, with 6‐month open‐label extension in probable AD subjects, on stable medications. MCT dose was 42 g/day, or maximum tolerated. Cognition was assessed with Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Cognigram®. Results Twenty subjects, average age 72.6 years, 45% women, 70% university educated had baseline MMSE 22.6/30 (10–29); MoCA 15.6/30 (4–27); baseline Cognigram® Part 1: 65–106, Part 2: 48–107. Average MCT oil consumption was 1.8 tablespoons/day (25.2 g, 234 kcal). Eighty percent remained stable or improved. Longer MCT exposure and age > 73, resulted in higher final MMSE ( P < .001) and Cognigram® 1 scores. Discussion This is the longest duration MCT AD study to date. Eighty percent had stabilization or improvement in cognition, and better response with 9‐month continual MCT oil.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it