Functional Outcome in Delusional Alzheimer Disease Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In spite of the prevalence of delusions in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and their association with poor outcomes, there has been little study of the impact of delusions on real-world functioning. METHOD: A number of databases, including Psychlit and Medline, were searched using the keywords: delusions, functional outcomes, activities of daily living, dementia, and Alzheimer's disease. Studies were included in the review if they were in English, restricted to patients with AD, and addressed delusions and function. RESULTS: The review yielded a total of 6 studies, 3 of which showed a correlation between delusions and real-world functioning and 3 of which did not. CONCLUSION: A critical analysis of the existing studies suggests that there may be an association between delusions and impaired real-world functioning. We believe that 2 of the 3 negative studies did not show an association due to issues relating to study design and the use of measures insensitive to executive impairment. This review highlights the future need for more scientifically rigorous studies to clarify this association, so as to ultimately improve treatment outcomes for patients.
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) | 0.001 | 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".