Presymptomatic apolipoprotein E genotyping for Alzheimer's disease risk assessment and prevention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current practice guidelines advocate apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotyping in cases of dementia and mild cognitive impairment and also in asymptomatic participants within the context of clinical/epidemiological research. APOE genotyping is not recommended for prognostication in cognitively intact persons outside the research arena. On the basis of emerging developments, in this article, we revisit the notion that presymptomatic APOE testing might be medically appropriate and ethical for the purpose of Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk assessment and prevention. In support of this thesis, recent evidence is adduced indicating that (i) the potency of potentially modifiable AD determinants and responsiveness to intervention may be affected by the presence or absence of the ε4 allele, (ii) disclosure of APOE status to asymptomatic individuals seeking AD risk assessment is well tolerated when appropriate safeguards are in place, and (iii) awareness of personal AD risk in general, and APOE status in particular, may motivate individuals to engage in beneficial, risk-lowering behaviors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".