Actovegin in the management of patients after ischemic stroke: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Actovegin is a hemodialysate of calf's blood and has been used for several decades in the countries of Central Asia, East Asia, Russia and some European countries. It has been used to treat patients with various neurological conditions, vascular disorders, and ischemic stroke. OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review to evaluate the effect of Actovegin in patients who have suffered an ischemic stroke. METHODS: A search of MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane and Embase was carried out from inception to October 10, 2021 for clinical trials and observational studies with a control group, published in English or Russian. RESULTS: Of 220 identified unique records, 84 full-text articles were screened, and 5 studies were selected that met the inclusion criteria. This included 4 observational studies with control groups and one randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. These studies enrolled a total of 3879 patients of which 720 patients received Actovegin administered intravenously and/or orally for a duration ranging from 10 to 180 days. Because of study heterogeneity, meta-analysis was not performed. No consistent evidence on improved survival, quality of life, neurologic symptoms, activities of daily living or disability was identified. One study showed statistically significant improvements in the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale, cognitive subscale, extended version (ADAS-cog+) for Actovegin compared with placebo at 6 months but the clinical relevance of this change is uncertain. One study reported a higher incidence of recurrent ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack or intracerebral hemorrhage in patients taking Actovegin compared to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The benefits of Actovegin are uncertain and that there is potential risk of harm in patients with stroke. More evidence is needed from rigorously designed clinical trials to justify the role of Actovegin in patients with ischemic stroke.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".