MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4299642280

Critical appraisal of the long-term impact of memantine in treatment of moderate to severe Alzheimer’s disease

2009· article· en· W4299642280 on OpenAlexaffabout
Umamon Puangthong, Ging‐Yuek Robin Hsiung

Bibliographic record

VenueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMemantineDiseaseMedicineTerm (time)PsychiatryPsychologyInternal medicineDementia
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Umamon Puangthong, Ging-Yuek Robin HsiungDivision of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, CanadaAbstract: Alzheimer’s disease is the most common cause of dementia in older adults. The clinical features include progressive memory decline as well as cognitive deficits with executive dysfunction, language, visual perceptual difficulties, apraxia and agnosia. During the moderate to severe stage of the disease, there is a major decline in memory and function, while neuropsychiatric disturbances often emerge and patients become difficult to manage. These distressing symptoms increase caregiver burden and add to the direct costs of care of the patients. Any improvements in patient function and behavioral symptoms can reduce caregiver burden. Memantine has been available for a number of years in Europe and in North America. In this article, we examine the pharmacological rationale for its use, and the current clinical evidence for its efficacy and long-term effectiveness in the management of cognitive and behavioral symptoms in moderate to severe stages of Alzheimer’s disease.Keywords: memantine, Alzheimer’s disease, dementia

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group)Same topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207