Novel verbal fluency scores and structural brain imaging for prediction of cognitive outcome in mild cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to assess the utility of novel verbal fluency scores for predicting conversion from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to clinical Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHOD: Verbal fluency lists (animals, vegetables, F, A, and S) from 107 MCI patients and 51 cognitively normal controls were transcribed into electronic text files and automatically scored with traditional raw scores and five types of novel scores computed using methods from machine learning and natural language processing. Additional scores were derived from structural MRI scans: region of interest measures of hippocampal and ventricular volumes and gray matter scores derived from performing ICA on measures of cortical thickness. Over 4 years of follow-up, 24 MCI patients converted to AD. Using conversion as the outcome variable, ensemble classifiers were constructed by training classifiers on the individual groups of scores and then entering predictions from the primary classifiers into regularized logistic regression models. Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted, and the area under the curve (AUC) was measured for classifiers trained with five groups of available variables. RESULTS: Classifiers trained with novel scores outperformed those trained with raw scores (AUC 0.872 vs 0.735; P < .05 by DeLong test). Addition of structural brain measurements did not improve performance based on novel scores alone. CONCLUSION: The brevity and cost profile of verbal fluency tasks recommends their use for clinical decision making. The word lists generated are a rich source of information for predicting outcomes in MCI. Further work is needed to assess the utility of verbal fluency for early AD.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".