A Longitudinal Study of Quantitative and Qualitative Features of Category Verbal Fluency in Incident Alzheimer’s Disease Subjects: Results from the PAQUID Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Category fluency tests were administered at baseline and after 3 and 5 years on two subgroups of subjects from a population-based cohort of elderly subjects: 52 cases of incident possible and probable Alzheimer's disease (AD) and 104 age- and education-matched subjects who remained nondemented. Quantitative and qualitative features of category fluency were assessed to determine how changes occur within 5 years of the diagnosis of AD. Consistent with previous results, we found that the number of words produced on this task was already significantly lower 5 years before the diagnosis in subjects with incident AD as compared with subjects who did not become demented. However, the rate of repetitions only significantly increased in AD subjects at the time of diagnosis, and the rate of intrusions remained low and not significantly different between the two groups. Thus, it is concluded that dysfunction in cognitive processes underlying repetitions and intrusions in verbal fluency tasks, such as inhibitory processes and working memory, may not be the main cause of the very early deficit in verbal fluency occurring 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".