BDNF Serum Levels with Respect to Multidimensional Assessment in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The clinical presentation of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is characterized by high heterogeneity, the greatest part of which still remains unexplained. OBJECTIVE: To assess serum levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) in ALS patients, implementing a multidimensional characterization focused on four a priori chosen elements of phenotypic variability: ALS bulbar/spinal subtype, cognitive impairment, mood dysfunction and disease progression speed. METHODS: Serum samples were obtained from 45 ALS outpatients (16% bulbar onset) and 22 healthy controls. Each patient underwent the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and disease progression speed was estimated by calculating the decay of the ALSFRS-R score over time. RESULTS: BDNF serum levels did not differ between patients and controls, although ∼25% lower levels characterized those patients carrying a depressive trait. Finally, BDNF serum levels were significantly lower in ALS patients expressing lower ALSFRS-R scores (r = 0.39, p < 0.01). No differences were found when considering cognitive impairment, disease progression speed and site of onset. CONCLUSION: BDNF serum levels might mark and possibly contribute in part to ALS phenotypic variability.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it