The evolution and pathology of frontotemporal dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a clinicopathologic study of a prospective, clinic-based cohort of patients with frontotemporal dementia (FTD)/Pick complex, who were followed to autopsy. A total of 60 patients with the clinical syndromes of the behavioural variant of FTD (FTD-bv) (n = 32), primary progressive aphasia (PPA) (n = 22), corticobasal degeneration syndrome (CBDS) (n = 4) and progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) (n = 2) at onset, referred to a cognitive neurology clinic who had subsequent post-mortem examination were included. The most common histological variety was motor neurone disease type inclusion (MNDI) (n = 18), followed by corticobasal degeneration (CBD) (n = 12), then Pick's disease (n = 6), dementia lacking distinctive histology (DLDH) (n = 6) and PSP (n = 3). Others fulfilled the histological criteria for Alzheimer's disease combined with glial pathology (n = 6), Alzheimer's disease only (n = 4), Lewy body variant (n = 2), prion disease (n = 1), vascular dementia (n = 1) and undetermined (n = 1). The most common first syndrome among the MNDI and DLDH (tau negative) pathologies was FTD-bv, but subsequently progressive aphasia (PA), occasionally CBDS and semantic dementia also developed. Tau positive histologies of CBD, PSP and Pick bodies were most frequently associated with PPA onset or CBDS/PSP, but behavioural symptoms were also common. Age of onset was earlier in tau negative cases, but the duration of illness and gender distribution were about the same in all histological variants. Although the tau negative and positive histologies are predicted to some extent by the clinical onset, the extent of the overlap and the convergence of the syndromes in the course of the disease argue in favour of maintaining the clinical and pathological varieties under a single umbrella.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".