Abstract 62: Effect of Ginkgo Diterpene Lactone Meglumine on Cognitive Function in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the effect of ginkgo diterpene lactone meglumine injection on cognitive function in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Methods: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo parallel-controlled, multicenter clinical trial. Patients with acute ischemic stroke within 48 hours of onset were enrolled. Patients were divided ginkgo diterpene group and placebo control group receive a 14-day treatment, the ginkgo diterpene group was treated with ginkgo diterpene lactone glucamine, and the placebo control group was treated with mimic ginkgo diterpene lactone glucamine injection. The evaluation index was the change of Montreal Cognitive Assessment scale (MoCA) score of at Day 14 and Day 90. Results: A total of 3452 patients from 100 centers were randomized, of which 3163 patients with complete data on MoCA at baseline, day 14, and day 90 were included in analysis set, with 1588 patients received ginkgo diterpene lactone glucamine injection and 1575 patients received mimic ginkgo diterpene lactone glucamine injection. The MoCA scores of the two groups increased after treatment, the average change of MoCA scores at Day 14 and Day 90 in ginkgo diterpene group was 3.93[95% confidence interval (CI), 3.77-4.09] and 5.51 (5.34-5.69), respectively, which was significantly higher than that in the in the placebo control group ( P < 0.05). MoCA subentry analysis showed that the scores of visual space and execution and language in the ginkgo diterpene group were significantly higher than those in the placebo control group at Day 14, and the scores in visual space and execution, attention, language and abstract in the ginkgo diterpene group were significantly higher than those in the placebo control group at Day 90. Conclusions: Ginkgo biloba diterpene lactone meglumine can effectively improve the cognitive function of patients with acute 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 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) | 0.000 | 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".