P‐052: Changes in brain ventricle volume associated with mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer disease in subjects participating in the Alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative (ADNI)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain atrophy rates measured on serial MRI may provide a quantitative marker of cognitive decline in Normal Elderly Controls (NEC), patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and patients with probable Alzheimer disease (AD). In particular, whole brain and ventricle atrophy appear to provide the greatest sensitivity [1], [2]. To compare absolute ventricular volumes and the rate of ventricle volume change over six months between NEC, MCI and AD subjects. Ten NEC (mean age = 76 years) and ten subjects with MCI (mean age = 72 years) and AD (mean age = 74 years) were randomly selected from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative [3] database (5 male, 5 female per group). Baseline and six month follow-up 3D T1-weighted anatomical magnetic resonance images (MRI) were obtained at 1.5T. Total lateral ventricle volumes were measured using semi-automated Brain Ventricle Quantification (BVQ) software [4] that incorporates a region-growing algorithm [5]. Seed points selected by an operator were used to calculate ventricular volumes in each subject. Absolute ventricle volumes were compared between groups using a ttest (p<0.05 considered significant) and the rate of ventricular enlargement over six months was compared between groups using a repeated measures ttest (p<0.05). There was a significant difference in absolute ventricle volume between the NEC and AD groups at baseline (p<0.05). There was a significant increase in ventricle volume after six months in the AD group (p < 0.05), although no change in Mini Mental State Exam score was observed. There was a significant difference in the rates of ventricular volume enlargement between the NEC and AD groups and the MCI and AD groups. There was no correlation found between the rate of ventricular enlargement and change in MMSE scores in any group. Ventricle volume changes were evident in AD patients compared to NEC and MCI. Inclusion of more subjects may be required to demonstrate differences between MCI and NEC.
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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".