Neuropsychiatric Symptoms in Alzheimer Disease, Vascular Dementia, and Mixed Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) are common in Alzheimer disease (AD) and vascular dementia (VaD), and are distressful to patients and caregivers. NPS are likely related to the underlying pathology. Previous studies suggest that frontal lobe lesions and vascular changes such as white matter hyperintensities (WMH) have a significant association with specific NPS. The current study aimed to compare NPS in patients with AD, VaD, and mixed AD/VaD, and to evaluate the differences in the prevalence of NPS in relation to frontal WMH volume. METHODS: In total, 180 patients with NPS and MRI data (92 probable AD, 51%; 34 probable VaD, 19%; and 54 probable mixed AD/VaD, 30%) were included in the study. Regression analyses were performed to determine the relationships between NPS prevalence and diagnosis, and between NPS and frontal WMH. RESULTS: VaD patients had significantly more agitation (p < 0.05; 40 vs. 14%) and sleep disturbances (p < 0.05; 57 vs. 32%) than AD patients, and significantly more depression (p < 0.05; 48 vs. 20%) and aberrant motor behaviors (p < 0.05; 31 vs. 13%) than mixed AD/VaD patients. AD patients with delusions had significantly greater right frontal WMH volumes than those without (p < 0.05; delusions 1/0 = 314.8/112.6 mm3). CONCLUSION: Differences in NPS prevalence are likely related to the underlying pathology and warrant further study as they have implications for treatment.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".