MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411577041 · doi:10.1192/bja.2025.10112

Neuroprotective effects of statins and cyclodextrins: review and potential role in dementia treatment

2025· article· en· W4411577041 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBJPsych Advances · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsOlds College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroprotectionDementiaMedicinePharmacologyNeuroscienceInternal medicinePsychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Dementia is a progressive and irreversible deterioration in cognition that has a significant impact on the person’s activities of daily living and quality of life. Currently, there is no curative treatment for dementia, and the treatments used in clinical practice have limited therapeutic reach. We begin this descriptive review with a discussion of apolipoprotein E4 (apoE4) and its role in the pathogenesis of dementia. We consider the molecular involvement of statins and why they are no longer clinically indicated in mild cognitive impairment or mild to moderate dementia. We then explore the evidence regarding the effects of statins and cyclodextrins on apoE4, presenting evidence in support of and against their neuroprotective effects in cognitive impairment. Although the studies on cyclodextrins have all been on animals, they provide a strong background for a potential research hypothesis for future clinical trials in the treatment of dementia.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it