Postmortem Examination of Vascular Lesions in Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A full appreciation of the presence of cerebral vascular lesions in cognitively impaired patients can be ultimately reached at the neuropathological level. However, there are no detailed guidelines regarding what neuropathologists should look for at autopsy in cases of suspected vascular dementia or vascular cognitive impairment. We aimed at surveying the postmortem neuropathological procedures used in different centers in examining brain lesions of presumable or possible vascular origin in cognitively impaired patients. METHODS: Thirteen laboratories participated in the survey by filling in a semistructured questionnaire. We reviewed sampling and histology procedures in use and the neuropathological definitions of some of these lesions. Neuropathological criteria for the definition of a vascular origin of the dementing process were also surveyed. RESULTS: A large variability across centers was observed in the procedures used for the neuropathological examination and the histology techniques. Heterogeneity existed also in the definition of commonly found lesions (eg, white matter alterations, small vessel disease), interpretation of whether or not the lesions were reputed to be of vascular origin, and consequently in the interpretation of the cause of cognitive decline. CONCLUSIONS: The appreciation of the presence of neuropathologically verified vascular lesions in cognitively impaired cases may be heavily influenced by the laboratory tools used and also by the heterogeneity of the criteria applied in different centers. Harmonization of neuropathological procedures is badly needed in the field of vascular dementia and vascular cognitive impairment to better understand the association between various vascular lesions and clinical symptoms such as cognitive impairment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".