Can Animal Models Inform on the Relationship between Depression and Alzheimer Disease?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The focus on the β-amyloid (Aβ) peptide in clinical Alzheimer disease (AD) as well as in animal models of AD has perhaps biased our understanding of what contributes to the heterogeneity in disease onset and progression. Part of this heterogeneity could reflect the various neuropsychiatric risk factors that present with common symptomatology and can predispose the brain to AD-like changes. One such risk factor is depression. Animal models, particularly mouse models carrying variants of AD-related gene(s), many of which lead to an accumulation of Aβ, suggest that a fundamental shift in depression-related monoaminergic systems (including serotonin and noradrenaline) is a strong indicator of the altered cellular function associated with the earlier(est) stages of AD-related pathology. These changes in monoaminergic neurochemistry could provide for relevant targets for intervention in clinical AD and/or could support a polypharmacy strategy, which might include the targeting of Aβ, in vulnerable populations. Future studies must also include female mice as well as male mice in animal model studies on the relationship between depression and AD.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".