MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Limitations of Clincal Criteria for the Diagnosis of Vascular Dementia in Clinical Trials: Is a Focus on Subcortical Vascular Dementia a Solution?

2000· article· en· W2106224964 on OpenAlexaff
Timo Erkinjuntti, Domenico Inzitari, Leonardo Pantoni, Anders Wallin, Philip Scheltens, Kenneth Rockwood, David W. Desmond

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVascular dementiaWhite matterDementiaMedicineEtiologyHyperintensityDiseaseClinical trialNeuroimagingPathologyNeurosciencePsychologyMagnetic resonance imagingRadiologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vascular dementia (VaD) includes several different vascular mechanisms and changes in the brain, and has different causes and clinical manifestations. Critical to its conceptualization and diagnosis are definitions of the cognitive syndrome, vascular etiologies, and changes in the brain. Variation in these has resulted in different definitions of VaD, estimates of prevalence, and types and distribution of brain lesions. This definitional heterogeneity may have been a factor for negative results in prior clinical trials on VaD. We propose that the division of VaD into subtypes can identify a more homogeneous group of patients for drug trials. A so-called "subcortical" VaD could incorporate two old clinical entities "Binswanger's disease" and "the lacunar state." Small vessel disease is the primary vascular etiology, lacunar infarcts and ischemic white matter lesions are the primary type of brain lesions, the subcortical areas and frontal connections are the primary location of lesions, and a subcortical syndrome as the primary clinical manifestation. The clinical syndromes are likely more variable, and urgently need to be categorized. Selection of these patients for clinical trials could mainly be based on brain imaging features, where the essential changes and the main aspects of the lesions include extensive ischemic white matter lesions and lacunar infarcts in the deep gray and white matter structures. Subcortical VaD is expected to show a more predictable clinical picture, natural history, outcomes, and treatment responses.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.631
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.494
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.035 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations115
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207