Communication Bridge‐2 randomized controlled trial: Recruitment and baseline features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Non-pharmacological interventions may offer significant benefits to the quality of life for persons with primary progressive aphasia (PPA) and their care partners but have lacked efficacy trials. To help fill the efficacy gap, we provide the feasibility of recruitment, enrollment, randomization, and baseline data for the Communication Bridge-2 (CB2) randomized controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: CB2 is the first international, single enrollment site, Phase 2, Stage 2, parallel-group, active control, RCT delivered via video chat to individuals with PPA and their care partners. Participants were recruited, screened, and randomized into one of two speech-language intervention arms. RESULTS: Ninety-five participant dyads (PPA mean baseline age: 67.1; 48% female) from four countries were enrolled and randomized. DISCUSSION: Global recruitment, enrollment, and randomization of individuals with PPA into a video chat-delivered non-pharmacologic RCT is feasible. This trial provides a potential model for conducting rigorous non-pharmacologic efficacy trials for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. HIGHLIGHTS: Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) negatively impacts communication participation. Communication Bridge-2 (CB2) is a telemedicine-delivered randomized controlled trial. CB2 included global recruitment and randomization of 95 PPA participant dyads. CB2, the first international superiority trial for PPA using video chat shows feasibility. The study provides a model for rigorous non-pharmacologic trials for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias.
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 | 0.029 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.003 |
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".