Efficacy of donepezil plus hydrogen–oxygen mixture inhalation for treatment of patients with Alzheimer disease: A retrospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate the clinical effect of donepezil combined with hydrogen-oxygen mixture inhalation in the treatment of patients with Alzheimer disease (AD), a total of 273 AD patients admitted to our hospital from March 2018 to March 2022 were retrospectively analyzed and assigned into an observation group (n = 138) and a control group (n = 135) according to the different treatment that they received. The control group was treated with donepezil tablets, while the observation group was treated with donepezil tablets combined with hydrogen-oxygen mixture inhalation. The scores of mini-mental state examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognition, activity of daily living scale (ADL) and the P300 event-related potential were compared between the 2 groups. After treatment, MMSE score, MoCA score, and ADL score in both groups increased after treatment (P < .01), while the improvement in the observation group was more significant than that in the control group (P < .001 for MMSE, P = .003 for MoCA, and P = .013 for ADL). The scores of Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognition in the observation group decreased after treatment (P < .05), while the improvement in the observation group was more significant than that in the control group (P = .005). After treatment, the latency of P300 in both groups was shortened (P < .01), and the improvement in the observation group was more significant than that in the control group (P < .001). The amplitude of the observation group increased after treatment (P < .01), and the improvement of the observation group was significant than that of the control group (P = .007). The clinical efficacy of donepezil combined with hydrogen-oxygen mixture inhalation in the treatment of AD is better than that of donepezil alone, which is worthy of further study.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".