Functional and anatomical memory indices in patients with or at risk for Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the sensitivity of the P300 event-related brain potential (ERP) recorded during a memory-demanding task to memory function in subjects with dementia of the Alzheimer's type (DAT), those with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and normal elderly controls. We also explored the ability of neuropsychological (delayed verbal memory), neuroanatomical (MRI-based hippocampal volume), and electrophysiological (memory search P300 amplitude) memory measures to distinguish between the three subject groups using discriminant function analyses. Fourteen patients with DAT, 16 with MCI, and 15 age- and education-matched controls were tested. P300 amplitude was reduced in DAT subjects at all levels of memory load; however, it did not differ between MCI and control subjects. Delayed verbal memory performance best discriminated DAT from MCI and control subjects, while delayed verbal memory and hippocampal volume best discriminated MCI subjects from controls. These results support the utility of neuropsychological and neuroanatomical measures in diagnosing dementia and do not support the notion that P300 amplitude is sensitive to mild memory dysfunction when measured using the current task.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".