Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy Is Associated With Executive Dysfunction and Mild Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Autopsy studies suggest that cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) is associated with cognitive impairment and risk for dementia. We analyzed neuropsychological test data from a prospective cohort study of patients with CAA to identify the prevalence of cognitive impairment and its associations with brain magnetic resonance imaging features and the apolipoprotein E genotype. METHODS: Data were analyzed from 34 CAA, 16 Alzheimer's disease, 69 mild cognitive impairment, and 27 ischemic stroke participants. Neuropsychological test results were expressed as z scores in relation to normative data provided by the test manuals and then grouped into domains of memory, executive function, and processing speed. RESULTS: Mean test scores in CAA participants were significantly lower than norms for memory (-0.44±1.03; P=0.02), executive function (-1.14±1.07; P<0.001), and processing speed (-1.06±1.12; P<0.001). Twenty-seven CAA participants (79%) had mild cognitive impairment based on low cognitive performance accompanied by cognitive concerns. CAA participants had similarly low executive function scores as Alzheimer's disease, but relatively preserved memory. CAA participants' scores were lower than those of ischemic stroke controls for executive function and processing speed. Lower processing speed scores in CAA were associated with higher magnetic resonance imaging white matter hyperintensity volume. There were no associations with the apolipoprotein E ε4 allele. CONCLUSIONS: Mild cognitive impairment is very prevalent in CAA. The overall cognitive profile of CAA is more similar to that seen in vascular cognitive impairment rather than Alzheimer's disease. White matter ischemic lesions may underlie some of the impaired processing speed in CAA.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".