MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998287918 · doi:10.1177/153331750201700105

Primary progressive aphasia: A review of the neourobiology of a common presentation of Pick complex

2002· review· en· W1998287918 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Kertesz, David G. Muñoz

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Alzheimer s Disease & Other Dementias® · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health CareWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimary progressive aphasiaPresentation (obstetrics)AphasiaPrimary (astronomy)PsychologyHistoryLinguisticsMedicinePhilosophyCognitive psychologyPathologyPhysicsRadiologyDementia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is an identifiable and distinct form of clinical presentation of focal degenerative disease. The underlying pathology is often considered heterogeneous, but we propose that, in fact, this syndrome has a characteristic underlying neurobiology related to Pick's disease and frontotemporal dementia. The authors reviewed the literature of PPA andfound 58 cases with autopsy. The majority of the cases had related underlying pathology, termed "Pick complex," a form of non-Alzheimer's dementia. This includes Pick's disease, corticobasal degeneration, dementia lacking distinctive histology, and motor neuron disease inclusions. Several of the cases described with focal Alzheimer's pathology do not fulfill the criteria of PPA, but have Alzheimer's disease with a major aphasic component.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations25
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Alzheimer s Disease & Other Dementias®Same topicNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismFrench-language works237,207