MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964048159 · doi:10.1159/000097371

Gross Anatomy of the Corpus Callosum in Alzheimer’s Disease: Regions of Degeneration and Their Neuropsychological Correlates

2006· article· en· W1964048159 on OpenAlexaff
Francesco Tomaiuolo, M. Scapin, Margherita Di Paola, P. Le Nezet, Lucia Fadda, M. Musicco, Carlo Caltagirone, D. Louis Collins

Bibliographic record

VenueDementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorpus callosumNeuropsychologyPsychologyDegenerative diseaseDementiaAlzheimer's diseaseNeuroscienceAudiologyCentral nervous system diseaseAnatomyDiseaseMedicinePathologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Differences in the gross shape of the corpus callosum (CC) and its subregional areas were investigated on brain MRI of patients with probable Alzheimer's disease (AD) and age- and gender-matched healthy normal control subjects. The AD patients differed from the normal control subjects in terms of a more convex shape and a reduced area of the CC. METHODS: As for the comparisons of the subregional areas of the CC, we adapted a splitting method which takes into account the modification of the global shape of the CC, and we implemented it by normalizing the CC, to avoid the bias introduced by the observed callosal shape variability. RESULTS: The application of this method unveiled that the regional CC reductions were located in the anterior and posterior third of the CC, i.e. where small myelinated fibers are more frequent. None of the neuropsychological scores collected at the time of the MRI investigation of AD could predict a regional and/or overall callosal area reduction. The only measure that correlated with area of the isthmus of the CC was the MMSE that was administered to all participants. CONCLUSIONS: This latter result may be used as an in vivo indicator of the progress of neocortical disintegration in AD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDementia and Geriatric Cognitive DisordersSame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207