Use of neuroprotective therapy in nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage: results of open-label randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim. To investigate the effectiveness and safety of Cellex® drug (active substance is polypeptides from the brain of pig embryos) in nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage.Material and methods. The study included 116 patients with hypertensive intracranial hemorrhage aged between 30 and 80 years. Patients of the treatment group (n = 61) in addition to the basic therapy were administered 0.1 mg (1 mL) of Cellex® once a day for 10 days while patients of the control group (n = 55) only received basic therapy in accordance with the clinical guidelines on management of patients with hypertensive intracranial hemorrhage. For 30 days, dynamics per the Glasgow Coma Scale, stroke severity per the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), patient disability per the Modified Rankin Scale (mRаnkin), Barthel and Rivermead scales, speech disorders per the Speech Questionnaire, cognitive functions per the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and a number of other characteristics were evaluated.Results. Percentage of survived patients (96.7 %) was higher in the Cellex® group compared to the control group (p = 0.0237). In the Cellex ® group, speech function per the Speech Questionnaire improved from 17.0 (14.0–22.0) to 24.0 (21.0–27.0) (p = 0.009) while in the control group no significant improvement in speech function was observed. A trend toward more significant decrease in stroke severity per NIHSS, patient disability per the mRаnkin, Barthel and Rivermead scales in the Cellex® group compared to the control group was observed. Cognitive functions per the Montreal Cognitive Assessment improved in the Cellex® group from 14.0 (12.0–22.5) to 20.0 (14.5–25.0) points. No adverse events were observed in the patient group receiving Cellex®.Conclusion. High efficacy and safety of Cellex® drug in patients with hypertensive intracranial hemorrhage were confirmed.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".