Matching Behavioral Variant Frontotemporal Dementia and Alzheimer Disease Groups on Dementia Severity (P1.227)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the comparability of dementia severity measures for matching groups with behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) and early-onset Alzheimer disease (AD) in research-studies. BACKGROUND: In bvFTD studies, early-onset AD-control-subjects are often chosen to control for dementia variables. In matching these dementia groups, investigators commonly use age, education, disease-duration, and Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE). We evaluated if dementia severity was comparable under this paradigm. DESIGN/METHODS: We analyzed prospectively-collected data from a study of bvFTD that enrolled AD-controls based on similar age, disease-duration, and cognitive performance on the MMSE and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA). Two other measures of dementia stage/severity were recorded: Functional Assessment Questionnaire (FAQ) total-score and frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD)-Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) sum-of-boxes. Demographics and mean scores were compared between bvFTD and AD subjects using chi-squared and unpaired t-tests. We simulated an alternate strategy by matching bvFTD and AD subjects on FTLD-CDR (±0.5 points), gender, and age. We performed the same comparisons of demographics and assessments using paired-sample t-tests. RESULTS: The bvFTD (20) and AD (24) subjects had similar ages and education. Despite comparable disease-duration [bvFTD:M=4.4±3.5, AD:M=3.8±2.0, p=.565], MMSE [bvFTD:M=24.5±4.3, AD:M=23.3±4.8, p=.401], and MOCA scores [bvFTD:M=18.1±6.0, AD:M=16.9±5.8, p=.614], bvFTD subjects were significantly more impaired than AD as measured by the FAQ [bvFTD:M=18.5±6.7, AD:M=12.0±5.9, p=.003] and FTLD-CDR [bvFTD:M=9.1±2.1, AD:M=5.1±2.1, p<.001]. Under the alternate matching strategy, for which 12 patients met criteria, bvFTD and AD subjects had comparable disease-duration (p=.814), MMSE (p=.055), and MOCA (p=.225); FAQ scores were no longer different (p=.650). CONCLUSIONS: bvFTD and AD patients who participate in research are not comparable when chosen using common cognitive screening measures. Comparing bvFTD and AD subjects on the FTLD-CDR created groups more similar in dementia severity and functional measures; hence, matching with this measure should be considered in studies that compare these two dementias. Study Supported by: NIA-Grant-R01AG034499-05(PI:MFM)
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 | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".