MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2035260603 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2011.05.381

P1‐102: Multi‐decade hippocampal and amygdala volume norms

2011· article· en· W2035260603 on OpenAlexaff
Abderazzak Mouiha, Simon Duchesne

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfoundingAnalysis of varianceDemographyLinear regressionRegression analysisRight hemisphereInternal medicinePsychologyMedicineMathematicsStatisticsAudiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The variability and time course of hippocampal (HC) and amygdala (AG) volumes throughout asymptotic adulthood have not been often characterized. We investigated the effects of age, sex and hemisphere on HC/AG volumes from subjects in the Italian Brain Normative Archive (Galluzzi et al., 2009). We included data on manual segmentation of 422 HC and 228 AG from 422 subjects in the Archive aged 20 to 84 years. We conducted correlation analysis, hierarchical regression and ANOVA to determine interaction effects. Interactions: There was no significant difference in age between men and women (p = 0.4094) and no interaction between sex and hemisphere on HC/AG volumes (hemisphere: HC - p < .0001; AG - p =0.011 / sex: HC - p < .0001; AG - p =0.0098). Only AG volumes for women when both hemispheres were considered and right AG volumes when all genders were considered have a negative correlation with Age. When sex was considered as confounding variable in hierarchical regression, age was linearly associated only with right AG volumes (Bêta = −3.365; p = 0.0078). Age and Age have no significant effects on HC/AG volumes (p > 0.280 for both HC and AG) in a quadratic regression model. Yet, if sex was introduced as an independent variable in the above models, age kept a weak effect on rightAG volumes (Bêta = −3.438; p = 0.0960). Normative data: When the subjects were divided by decade into six different strata ,the difference between age groups was significant only for right AG volumes (p = 0.0212). A Tucky multiple comparison test showed that there was no significant difference in HC volumes between any strata. The distribution of HC/AG volumes showed homogeneity of volumes for HC but not for AG throughout all groups. Except for the rightAG, this study demonstrates that age has no discernable effects on HC/AG volumes and that there exists as wide a variability in early adulthood as in later years. The volumes from the Archive can be used as normative data for future research and clinical studies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.005

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicMemory and Neural Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→