Beyond the hippocampus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine volumetric changes in limbic structures in patients with probable AD using planimetric measures on MRI. METHOD: Limbic structures (i.e., hippocampus, amygdala, anterior thalamus, hypothalamus, mamillary bodies, basal forebrain, septal area, fornix, and cingulate, orbitofrontal, and parahippocampal cortices) were traced on 3D T1-weighted MR images of 40 patients with mild to moderate AD and 40 age-, sex-, and education-matched normal control subjects. Limbic volumes were compared between groups and the predictive ability was assessed. RESULTS: Overall, limbic structures showed significant atrophy in AD patients compared with normal control subjects. Differences (p < 0.05) were found in all limbic regions except the anterior cingulate cortex. The greatest percentage volumetric losses occurred in the septal area (34%), hippocampus (28%), amygdala (21%), parahippocampal cortex (21%), and posterior cingulate cortex (20%). Combining volumetric measures of amygdala and septal area distinguished patients with AD from normal control subjects with 93% accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: These results verify that system-wide limbic degeneration occurs in patients with AD. In addition, atrophy in selected limbic structures was used to distinguish patients with AD from normal elderly individuals with over 90% accuracy in this select clinical sample. The measures require further exploration in samples more representative of those seen by primary care physicians before their utility can be accurately assessed.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".