Hippocampal subfield surface deformity in nonsemantic primary progressive aphasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Alzheimer neuropathology (AD) is found in almost half of patients with non-semantic primary progressive aphasia (PPA). This study examined hippocampal abnormalities in PPA to determine similarities to those described in amnestic AD. METHODS: In 37 PPA patients and 32 healthy controls, we generated hippocampal subfield surface maps from structural MRIs and administered a face memory test. We analyzed group and hemisphere differences for surface shape measures and their relationship with test scores and ApoE genotype. RESULTS: The hippocampus in PPA showed inward deformity (CA1 and subiculum subfields) and outward deformity (CA2-4+DG subfield) and smaller left than right volumes. Memory performance was related to hippocampal shape abnormalities in PPA patients, but not controls, even in the absence of memory impairments. CONCLUSIONS: Hippocampal deformity in PPA is related to memory test scores. This may reflect a combination of intrinsic degenerative phenomena with transsynaptic or Wallerian effects of neocortical neuronal loss.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".