The Prevalence of Misidentification Syndromes in Neurodegenerative Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although misidentification syndromes (MISs) have been often described in Alzheimer disease (AD), the prevalence of these phenomena in different neurodegenerative diseases has not been systematically studied. Three hundred ninety-two individuals with probable AD, 119 patients with the behavioral variety of frontotemporal dementia (FTD-bv), 101 patients with primary progressive aphasia, 24 subjects with semantic dementia, 18 subjects with corticobasal degeneration, 8 patients with progressive supranuclear palsy, 36 individuals with probable Lewy body dementia (DLB), and 26 subjects with Parkinson disease (PD) were the participants of this study. On the basis of a semistructured interview with both patients and their reliable caregivers, MIS was identified in 15.8% of cases with AD, 16.6% of patients with DLB, and in 8.3% of individuals with semantic dementia. The most frequent form of MIS was Capgras delusions, often accompanied by reduplication of place, phantom border phenomenon, or both. Although MIS typically appears in later stages of the disease, it can also occur surprisingly early in patients with AD. None of the patients with FTD-bv, primary progressive aphasia, corticobasal degeneration/supranuclear palsy, or PD developed MIS. Thus, our findings suggest that MISs are characteristic of AD and DLB, and tend to exclude FTD/Pick complex and PD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".