| Title |
Efficacy and safety of Ginkgo biloba standardized extract in the treatment of vascular cognitive impairment: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ndt.s120790 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vida Demarin, Vanja Bašić Kes, Zlatko Trkanjec, Mislav Budišić, Marija Bošnjak Pašić, Petra Črnac, Hrvoje Budinčević |
| Abstract |
The aim of this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was to determine the efficacy and safety of Ginkgo biloba extract in patients diagnosed with vascular cognitive impairment (VCI). A total of 90 patients (aged 67.1±8.0 years; 59 women) were randomly allocated (1:1:1) to receive G. biloba 120 mg, G. biloba 60 mg, or placebo during a 6-month period. Assessment was made for efficacy indicators, including neuropsychological tests scores (Sandoz Clinical Assessment Geriatric Scale, Folstein Mini-Mental State Examination, Mattis Dementia Rating Scale, and Clinical Global Impression) and transcranial Doppler ultrasound findings. Safety indicators included laboratory findings, reported adverse reactions, and clinical examination. At the end of 6-month study period, G. biloba 120 and 60 mg showed a statistically significant positive effect in comparison with placebo only on the Clinical Global Impression score (2.6±0.8 vs 3.1±0.7 vs 2.8±0.7, respectively; P=0.038). The Clinical Global Impression score showed a significant deterioration from the baseline values in the placebo group (-0.3±0.5; P=0.021) as opposed to G. biloba groups. No significant differences were found in the transcranial Doppler ultrasound findings. Adverse reactions were significantly more common and serious in the placebo group (16 subjects) than in either of the two G. biloba extract groups (eight and nine subjects, respectively), whereas laboratory findings and clinical examinations revealed no differences between the groups receiving G. biloba extract and placebo. According to our results, G. biloba seemed to slow down the cognitive deterioration in patients with VCI, but the effect was shown in only one of the four neuropsychological tests administered. However, because of this mild effect in combination with a few adverse reactions, we cannot say that it is ineffective or unsafe either. Further studies are still needed to provide unambiguous evidence on the efficacy and safety of G. biloba extract. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 116 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 13% |
| Researcher | 13 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 14 | 12% |
| Unknown | 39 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 10 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 21 | 18% |
| Unknown | 41 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 May 2019.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#2,328
of 3,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#322,774
of 424,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#69
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,131 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 424,972 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.