MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2725866395 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igx004.3838

FALLERS AND CORTICAL BRAIN VOLUMES: CROSS-SECTIONAL ANALYSIS IN COGNITIVELY HEALTHY OLDER ADULTS

2017· article· en· W2725866395 on OpenAlexaff
Olivier Beauchet, Gilles Allali, Joe Verghese

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosterior parietal cortexSomatosensory systemPremotor cortexWhite matterCortex (anatomy)Physical medicine and rehabilitationSecondary somatosensory cortexPsychologyMedicineTemporal cortexNeuroscienceMagnetic resonance imagingAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fall is a consequence of gait instability. Cortical and subcortical abnormalities have been associated with gait instability but not yet with fall. This study aims to compare the global and regional brain subvolumes between healthy fallers and non-fallers. A total of 77 healthy older individuals (23 fallers and 54 non-fallers, 69.8 ± 3.5years; 45.5% female) were included in this study using a cross-sectional design. Based on an a priori hypothesis, the following brain subvolumes were quantified from three-dimensional T1-weighted MRI using FreeSurfer: total white matter abnormalities, total white matter, total cortical and subcortical gray matters, hippocampus, motor cortex, somatosensory cortex, premotor cortex, prefrontal cortex and parietal cortex. Age, sex, body mass index, comorbidities, use of psychoactive drugs, far-distance vision, lower-limb proprioception, depressive symptoms and cognitive scores (Mini-Mental State Examination, Frontal Assessment Battery) were used as covariates. Multiple logistic regressions showed that subvolumes of the somatosensory cortex (P<0.042) and the hippocampus (P<0.042) were increased in fallers compared to non-fallers, even after adjustment for clinical and brain characteristics. The greater subvolumes of somatosensory cortex and hippocampus reported in fallers compared to non-fallers suggest a possible brain compensatory mechanism involving spatial navigation and integration of sensory information.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207