MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2074890469 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2014.07.074

P4‐303: COGNITIVE FUNCTION AND TRACTOGRAPHY OF WHITE MATTER TRACTS CROSSING HYPERINTENSITIES IN ELDERLY PERSONS

2014· article· en· W2074890469 on OpenAlexaff
Ángeles García, William Reginold, Angela Luedke, Justine Itorralba, Juan Fernández-Ruíz, Jenifer Reinold, Omar Islam

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMemory spanWechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleFractional anisotropyStroop effectPsychologyHyperintensityDiffusion MRIAudiologyDementiaWhite matterFluid-attenuated inversion recoveryBoston Naming TestNeuropsychologyCognitionMagnetic resonance imagingMedicineNeuroscienceInternal medicineWorking memoryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is clinical need for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measures of white matter hyperintenstity (WMH) severity that relate to performance on neuropsychological testing. This study used diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) tractography to determine if there was an association between the integrity of tracts crossing WMH and cognitive function. Brain T2 fluid attenuated inversion recovery-weighted (FLAIR) and diffusion tensor MRI scans were acquired in thirty-four persons with and without dementia, 60 of age or older. All subjects completed a battery of neuropsychological tests including Trails in seconds, Wechsler Memory Scale-III Longest span backwards and Longest span forward, Stroop test and California Verbal Learning Test Long delay free recall. Dementia was diagnosed following the NINCDS-ADRDA criteria. Tractography was generated by the Fiber Assignment by Continuous Tracking method. WMH were identified on T2 FLAIR scans. The fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD) were quantified for all the tracts that crossed WMH (WMH-tract). We studied the association between performance on a battery of cognitive tests with WMH-tract FA and MD while controlling for age, sex, dementia diagnosis and total volume of WMH. There was a statistically significant association between MoCA scores and the MD of WMH-tracts (regression coefficient: 14060, 95% CI: 1 788 to 26 320, n=34, p=0.03) as well as between performance on the Wechsler Memory Scale-III Longest span forward and the MD of WMH-tracts (coefficient: -12940, 95% CI: -22 940 to -2 934, n=24, p=0.01). There was no association, however, between the MoCA scores and the FA of WMH-tracts (coefficient: -15.57, 95% CI: -39.81 to 8.67, n= 34, p= 0.20) or focused attention and FA of WMH-tracts (Longest span forward test, coefficient: 10.19, 95% CI: -12.40 to 32.77, n=24, p=0.36). This study demonstrated a novel correlation between the MD of WMH-tracts and cognitive function. The mean diffusivity of tracts crossing WMH represents a novel measure of WMH burden. In the elderly population with a high prevalence of WMH, DTI tractography could become helpful in triaging patients for further cognitive testing.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.263 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→