Interactions of the Salience Network and Its Subsystems with the Default-Mode and the Central-Executive Networks in Normal Aging and Mild Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) investigations suggest that the intrinsically organized large-scale networks and the interaction between them might be crucial for cognitive activities. A triple network model, which consists of the default-mode network, salience network, and central-executive network, has been recently used to understand the connectivity patterns of the cognitively normal brains versus the brains with disorders. This model suggests that the salience network dynamically controls the default-mode and central-executive networks in healthy young individuals. However, the patterns of interactions have remained largely unknown in healthy aging or those with cognitive decline. In this study, we assess the patterns of interactions between the three networks using dynamical causal modeling in resting state fMRI data and compare them between subjects with normal cognition and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). In healthy elderly subjects, our analysis showed that the salience network, especially its dorsal subnetwork, modulates the interaction between the default-mode network and the central-executive network (Mann-Whitney U test; p < 0.05), which was consistent with the pattern of interaction reported in young adults. In contrast, this pattern of modulation by salience network was disrupted in MCI (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the degree of disruption in salience network control correlated significantly with lower overall cognitive performance measured by Montreal Cognitive Assessment (r = 0.295; p < 0.05). This study suggests that a disruption of the salience network control, especially the dorsal salience network, over other networks provides a neuronal basis for cognitive decline and may be a candidate neuroimaging biomarker of cognitive impairment.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".