Effects of Vitamin D3 Combined with Folic Acid on Domain and Specific Cognitive Function among Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: To investigate the effect of vitamin D3 (VD3) combined with folic acid (FA) intervention on the cognitive function among patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and vitamin D deficiency. METHODS: Our study is a single-center, randomized, controlled trial. A total of 402 patients were randomly assigned to the placebo group (n=135), FA group (n=134), and FA+1600IU VD3 group (n=133). The intervention period was 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was the mean change in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) compared to baseline. Secondary endpoints included other cognitive functions, serum vitamin D, folic acid, and homocysteine levels. RESULTS: The Intention-to-Treat analysis results of MoCA showed that the adjusted Least Squares Means (LSM) differences between the FA+1600IU VD3 group and the placebo or FA group were 0.456 (95% CI -0.198 to 1.11; p=0.171) and 0.038 (95% CI -0.600 to 0.676; p=0.907), respectively, and the Per-protocol set analysis results showed that the adjusted LSM differences between the FA+1600IU VD3 group and the placebo or FA group were 0.659 (95% CI 0.005 to 1.313; p=0.048) and 0.251 (95% CI -0.387 to 0.889; p=0.44), respectively. CONCLUSION: The effect of FA+1600IU VD3 intervention for 6 months on overall cognitive function in MCI patients with vitamin D deficiency was not significant, but its role may be underestimated and requires further long-term studies to confirm.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".