Registry for vascular cognitive impairment treatment with traditional Chinese medicine (REVIEW-TCM): Rationale and design of a prospective, observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) is one of the most common diseases among the elderly. However, few effective drugs have been approved for VCI. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been used in dementia for thousands of years. Currently, there is limited high-quality evidence for the efficacy of TCM, and the specific characteristics of its effects and the appropriate patient populations for TCM therapies remain unclear. Herein, we aim to explore the effectiveness and safety of TCM by conducting a longitudinal, patient-centered study. Methods REgistry for Vascular cognitive Impairment trEatment With Traditional Chinese Medicine (REVIEW-TCM) is a prospective, observational disease registry study. 1000 VCI patients at the Hunan Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine will be recruited based on the following criteria: aged 18 years or older, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score < 26, and Hachinski Ischemic Score (HIS)≥7. There is no strict limit on the intervention, and different TCM formulas will be focused. Cognition, activity of daily living, quality of life, mental, psychology, ZHENG of TCM, and burden of caregiver will be evaluated at admission, and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Meanwhile, biological tests and neuroimaging examination will be applied to further explore the mechanism of TCM. Especially, a mixed-methods embedded design will be applied by adopting quantitative and qualitative studies to explore patients-reported outcomes of TCM. Finally, propensity score matching will be adopted to analyze the effectiveness of TCM. Discussion To the best of our knowledge, the REVIEW-TCM study is the first comprehensive, prospective, mixed-methods, registry-based study to evaluate TCM treatment in VCI, which will analyze the effectiveness and safety of TCM in the real world and explore population characteristics and subtypes of VCI suitable for TCM. Study registration This study was registered on www.chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR2200064756).
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 | 0.040 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".