Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 169

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Donepezil Therapy in Clinical Practice: A Randomized Crossover Study

Greenberg, Steven M., Tennis, Marsha K., Brown, Laura B., Gomez-Isla, Teresa, Hayden, Douglas L., Schoenfeld, David A., Walsh, Katie L., Corwin, Claire, Daffner, Kirk R., Friedman, Pamela, Meadows, Mary-Ellen, Sperling, Reisa A., Growdon, John H.·2000·Archives of Neurology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of donepezil hydrochloride for the treatment of Alzheimer disease in patients drawn from clinical practice. DESIGN: Two-center, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-masked crossover study. SETTING: Memory disorders units at Massachusetts General and Brigham and Women's hospitals, Boston. PATIENTS: Sixty individuals (30 men and 30 women; mean +/- SD age, 75.0+/-9.5 years) with probable Alzheimer disease and scores of 20 or less on the information-memory-concentration subscale of the Blessed Dementia Scale. INTERVENTIONS: Placebo wash-in, followed in randomized sequence by (1) donepezil hydrochloride therapy, 5 mg/d, for 6 weeks, followed by placebo washout for 6 weeks and (2) placebo treatment for 6 weeks. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Change in Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale cognitive subscale scores from the beginning to the end of the two 6-week treatment periods. RESULTS: Among patients completing treatment and testing for both periods (n = 48), subscale scores improved (mean +/- SEM) 2.17+/-0.98 points (95% confidence interval, 0.20-4.10 points) during donepezil therapy relative to placebo therapy (P = .04). Scores returned toward baseline within 3 weeks of drug washout. There was no associated change in caregiver-rated global impression (donepezil vs placebo: proportion improved, 0.24 vs 0.22; proportion worsened, 0.27 vs 0.35; P = .34) or on specific tests of explicit memory or verbal fluency. Contrary to studies with tacrine, the presence of the apolipoprotein E epsilon4 allele did not predict donepezil treatment failure. Most common adverse events related to donepezil therapy were nausea (5 patients), diarrhea (3 patients), and agitation (3 patients). Serious events possibly related to drug use were seizure, pancreatitis, and syncope (1 patient each). CONCLUSION: This independent confirmation of data from phase 3 trials suggests that donepezil therapy modestly improves cognition in patients with Alzheimer disease who are encountered in clinical practice.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archneur.57.1.94

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 169

Metadata

Authors
Greenberg, S. M., Tennis, M. K., Brown, L. B., Gomez-Isla, T., Hayden, D. L., Schoenfeld, D. A., Walsh, K. L., Corwin, C., Daffner, K. R., Friedman, P., Meadows, M.-E., Sperling, R. A., & Growdon, J. H.
Venue
Archives of Neurology
Published
2000-01-01
Volume
57
Issue
1
Pages
94
ISSN
0003-9942 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2031149574
Cited by
169
References
6
FWCI
10.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Donepezil Therapy in Clinical Practice: A Randomized Crossover Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archneur.57.1.94
The paper
Greenberg, S. M., Tennis, M. K., Brown, L. B., Gomez-Isla, T., Hayden, D. L., Schoenfeld, D. A., Walsh, K. L., Corwin, C., Daffner, K. R., Friedman, P., Meadows, M.-E., Sperling, R. A., & Growdon, J. H. (2000). Donepezil Therapy in Clinical Practice: A Randomized Crossover Study. Archives of Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.57.1.94

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.