Total Brain and Hippocampal Volumes and Cognition in Older American Indians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Estimates of hippocampal volume by magnetic resonance imaging have clinical and cognitive correlations and can assist in early Alzheimer disease diagnosis. However, little is known about the relationship between global or regional brain volumes and cognitive test performance in American Indians. MATERIALS AND METHODS: American Indian participants (N=698; median age, 72 y) recruited for the Cerebrovascular Disease and its Consequences in American Indians study, an ancillary study of the Strong Heart Study cohort, were enrolled. Linear regression models assessed the relationship between magnetic resonance imaging brain volumes (total brain and hippocampi) and cognitive measures of verbal learning and recall, processing speed, verbal fluency, and global cognition. RESULTS: After controlling for demographic and clinical factors, all volumetric measurements were positively associated with processing speed. Total brain volume was also positively associated with verbal learning, but not with verbal recall. Conversely, left hippocampal volume was associated with both verbal learning and recall. The relationship between hippocampal volume and recall performance was more pronounced among those with lower scores on a global cognitive measure. Controlling for APOE ε4 did not substantively affect the associations. CONCLUSIONS: These results support further investigation into the relationship between structural Alzheimer disease biomarkers, cognition, genetics, and vascular risk factors in aging American Indians.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".