Effects of an Oroxylum indicum extract (Sabroxy®) on cognitive function in adults with Self-reported mild cognitive impairment: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Oroxylum indicum has been used in traditional Ayurvedic medicine for the prevention and treatment of several diseases and may have neuroprotective effects. \n \nPurpose: Examine the effects of Oroxylum indicum on cognitive function in older adults with self-reported cognitive complaints. \n \nStudy Design: Two-arm, parallel-group, 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. \n \nMethods: Eighty-two volunteers received either 500 mg, twice daily of a standardized Oroxylum indicum extract or placebo. Outcome measures included several computer-based cognitive tasks, the Control, Autonomy, Self-Realization, and Pleasure scale (CASP-19), Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ), and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Changes in the concentration of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) were also examined. \n \nResults: Compared to the placebo, Oroxylum indicum was associated with greater improvements in episodic memory, and on several computer-based cognitive tasks such as immediate word recall and numeric working memory, and a faster rate of learning on the location learning task. However, there were no other significant differences in performance on the other assessed cognitive tests, the MoCA total score, or other self-report questionnaires. BDNF concentrations increased significantly in both groups, with no statistically-significant between-group differences. Oroxylum indicum was well tolerated except for an increased tendency for mild digestive complaints and headaches. \n \nConclusion: The results of this first human trial on the cognitive-enhancing effects of Oroxylum indicum suggest that it is a promising herbal candidate for the improvement of cognitive function in older adults with self-reported cognitive complaints.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".