MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2460296584 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2016.05.008

Apathy associated with neurocognitive disorders: Recent progress and future directions

2016· review· en· W2460296584 on OpenAlexaff
Krista L. Lanctôt, Luis Agüera-Ortíz, Henry Brodaty, Paul T. Francis, Yonas E. Geda, Zahinoor Ismail, Gad A. Marshall, Moyra E. Mortby, Chiadi U. Onyike, Prasad R. Padala, Antonios Politis, Paul B. Rosenberg, Emma Siegel, David L. Sultzer, Eleenor H Abraham

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of TorontoOntario Brain InstituteSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute on AgingNational Health and Medical Research CouncilAustralian Research CouncilU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsApathyNeurocognitivePsychologyNeuroimagingPsychiatryIntervention (counseling)Psychological interventionDementiaAlzheimer's diseaseDiseaseCognitionClinical psychologyMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Apathy is common in neurocognitive disorders (NCDs) such as Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment. Although the definition of apathy is inconsistent in the literature, apathy is primarily defined as a loss of motivation and decreased interest in daily activities. METHODS: The Alzheimer's Association International Society to Advance Alzheimer's Research and Treatment (ISTAART) Neuropsychiatric Syndromes Professional Interest Area (NPS-PIA) Apathy workgroup reviewed the latest research regarding apathy in NCDs. RESULTS: Progress has recently been made in three areas relevant to apathy: (1) phenomenology, including the use of diagnostic criteria and novel instruments for measurement, (2) neurobiology, including neuroimaging, neuropathological and biomarker correlates, and (3) interventions, including pharmacologic, nonpharmacologic, and noninvasive neuromodulatory approaches. DISCUSSION: Recent progress confirms that apathy has a significant impact on those with major NCD and those with mild NCDs. As such, it is an important target for research and intervention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations228
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207