Efficacy of electrical acupuncture on vascular cognitive impairment with no dementia: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Vascular cognitive impairment with no dementia (VCIND), manifested mainly as mild impairment of concentration and executive function, is the early phase of vascular dementia (VD). Currently, there is no specific treatment for VCIND. We hypothesize that electrical acupuncture can improve the mental and motor functions of patients with VCIND. Thus, we designed this randomized controlled trial to test this hypothesis by comparing the therapeutic effect of electrical acupuncture versus sham acupuncture in patients with VCIND. Method/Design In this single-center 3-year study, 120 eligible patients will be recruited and randomly assigned to receive electrical acupuncture treatment (n = 60) or sham acupuncture (n = 60) for 8 consecutive weeks (24 sessions in total), with the same acupoint prescription (DU20, EX-HN3, DU24, DU17, DU26, EX-HN1, HT7, PC6, GB20, SP6). The primary assessment is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. The secondary assessments are the Modified Barthel Index and Event-Related Potential. All outcomes will be assessed at baseline, endpoint, and follow-up at 8 and 24 weeks after the end of treatment. Discussion If the outcome confirms the effectiveness and safety of electrical acupuncture in treating VCIND, this treatment is expected to be promoted in clinical practice to treat such patients. Trial Registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry identifier: ChiCTR-IIR-17011513 ; Registered on 27 May 2017.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.122 | 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".