Ginkgo biloba extract EGb 761® improves cognition and overall condition after ischemic stroke: Results from a pilot randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Patients who experienced an ischemic stroke are at risk for cognitive impairment. Quantified Ginkgo biloba extract EGb 761 ® has been used to treat cognitive dysfunction, functional impairment and neuropsychiatric symptoms in mild cognitive impairment and dementia. Objectives: To assess the cognitive-related effects of EGb 761 ® treatment in patients after acute ischemic stroke, as well as the feasibility of patient selection and outcome measures. Methods: We conducted a randomized, multicentric, open-label trial at 7 centers in China. Patients scoring 20 or lower on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale were enrolled between 7 and 14 days after stroke onset and randomly assigned to receive 240 mg per day of EGb 761 ® or no additional therapy for 24 weeks in a 1:1 ratio. Both groups received standard treatments for the prevention of recurrent stroke during the trial. General cognitive function and a battery of cognitive tests for sub-domains were evaluated at 24 weeks. All patients were monitored for adverse events. Results: 201 patients ≥50 years old were included, with 100 assigned to the EGb 761 ® group and 101 to the reference group. The mean change from baseline on the global cognitive function as assessed by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment score was 2.92 in the EGb 761 ® group and 1.33 in the reference group (between-group difference: 1.59 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51 to 2.67; p < 0.005). For cognitive domains, EGb 761 ® showed greater effects on the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test Total Recall (EGb 761 ® change 1.40 vs. reference −0.49) and Form 1 of the Shape Trail Test (EGb 761 ® change −38.2 vs. reference −15.6). Potentially EGb 761 ® -related adverse events occurred in no more than 3% of patients. Conclusion: Over the 24-week period, EGb 761 ® treatment improved overall cognitive performance among patients with mild to moderate ischemic stroke. Our findings provide valuable recommendations for the design of future trials, including the criteria for patient selection. Clinical Trial Registration: www.isrctn.com , identifier ISRCTN11815543.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".