Saccade deficits in amnestic mild cognitive impairment resemble mild Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a disorder of progressive memory loss and executive dysfunction. Little is known about the progression from amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI; isolated memory loss) to AD. Studies have found impairments in mild-stage AD and aMCI in specific tests of executive function. Here, we used objective saccade tasks to determine if they can effectively assess executive function deficits otherwise assessed by neuropsychological testing. To determine which executive function deficits the saccade tasks are most sensitive to, we also investigated the relationship between performance on saccade tasks and neuropsychological test scores. Twenty-two aMCI patients (63-90 years), 24 mild AD patients (61-87 years) and 76 healthy controls (60-85 years) performed a battery of neuropsychological tests, and two saccade tasks designed to probe sensory, motor and cognitive function. The prosaccade task requires a fast, automatic saccade toward an eccentric visual stimulus. The antisaccade task requires additional executive processing to inhibit the automatic prosaccade toward the stimulus, so that a voluntary saccade can be initiated to a location opposite the stimulus. Antisaccade performance was impaired similarly in aMCI and AD patients relative to controls; both groups were slower to initiate correct antisaccades and they made more direction errors (erroneous prosaccades), suggesting similar brain deficits. Scores on the Stroop task were inversely correlated with the percentage of short-latency direction errors in the antisaccade task for controls and aMCI patients, whereas other more global measures of executive function were not related to saccade measures in any subject group. Our results show that the antisaccade task is useful for detecting executive dysfunction in aMCI and AD, especially dysfunction in selective attention. Saccade tasks may therefore have potential to assess executive dysfunction when use of neuropsychological tests is not possible.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".