MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984078096 · doi:10.1159/000115848

Cognitive Impairment No Dementia – Neuropsychological and Neuroimaging Characterization of an Amnestic Subgroup

2008· article· en· W1984078096 on OpenAlexaff
Claudia Jacova, Kevin R. Peters, B. Lynn Beattie, Erick B. Wong, Andrew Riddehough, Dean Foti, Philip Scheltens, David K.B. Li, Howard Feldman

Bibliographic record

VenueDementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsTrent UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaClinical Dementia RatingPsychologyNeuropsychologyAudiologyNeuroimagingNeuropsychological testEpisodic memoryTemporal lobeAlzheimer's diseaseCognitionPsychiatryClinical psychologyCognitive impairmentMedicineDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Cognitive impairment no dementia (CIND) describes individuals whose cognitive functioning falls below normal but who do not meet dementia criteria. An important goal within CIND is to identify subgroups that will predictably progress to Alzheimer disease. CIND with amnestic deficits has been associated with high risk of Alzheimer disease but has until now been investigated on a retrospective basis. In this study a prospectively defined amnestic CIND group was characterized on a detailed neuropsychological test battery and on structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measures. METHODS: Amnestic CIND was defined as meeting at least 1 but not all DSM-IV-TR criteria for dementia, scoring > or =1 SD below norms on Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test delayed recall, having a Clinical Dementia Rating score of 0.5 and a Mini-Mental State Exam score > or =24. This cross-sectional study compared subjects meeting these criteria (n = 25) to age- and education-matched controls (n = 26). The neuropsychological battery included memory and nonmemory measures that were analyzed as continuous variables and dichotomized into impaired (> or =1 SD below controls) versus nonimpaired. MRI scans were evaluated with a global-brain volumetric measure [brain fractional ratio (BFR)] and with visually based medial temporal lobe atrophy (MTA) ratings. RESULTS: Amnestic CIND had neuropsychological impairment in the episodic memory domain and also in nonmemory domains. There were 80% of CIND subjects with multidomain impairment. The most clear-cut nonmemory impairment was in the verbal ability domain, with 64% of subjects affected and a moderate effect size (d = 0.7). On MRI, BFR was lower (74.5 +/- 4.6 vs. 75.5 +/- 4.4) and MTA higher (72 vs. 38% with MTA > or =1) in CIND than in control subjects. BFR correlated with MTA (r = -0.45) and with a composite memory score (r = 0.296). CONCLUSION: A prospective amnestic CIND grouping appears to identify individuals with a multidomain pattern of neuropsychological impairment and with both medial temporal lobe and global brain atrophy.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.269 · 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.

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

Citations27
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDementia and Geriatric Cognitive DisordersSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207