Investigating Nutritional Status in Moderate to Severe Alzheimer's Disease Patients Enrolled in a Randomized Controlled Trial with Nabilone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nutritional status is of great clinical significance in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) patients as malnutrition can increase risk of morbidity, mortality and severity of neuropsychiatric symptoms. Due to a lack of pharmacological treatments for malnutrition, we investigate the use of nabilone, a synthetic cannabinoid, for the improvement of nutritional status. Patients were recruited from a clinical trial in AD patients with clinically significant agitation. Patients treated with nabilone did not have improved nutritional status over time as assessed by the Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form (b=-0.020 (95%CI -0.27 to 0.23), p=0.87) and body mass index (b=0.020 (95%CI -0.13 to 0.17), p=0.79). Safety outcomes did not significantly differ with respect to nutrition for patients receiving nabilone treatment. By identifying efficacious interventions to manage nutrition in an at-risk population, there may be potential to improve quality of life for AD patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".