MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889469989 · doi:10.1016/j.dadm.2018.07.010

Do 2‐year changes in superior frontal gyrus and global brain atrophy affect cognition?

2018· article· en· W2889469989 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maria del C. Valdés Hernández, Stuart Reid, Shadia Mikhael, Cyril Pernet

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia Diagnosis Assessment & Disease Monitoring · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of EdinburghScottish Funding CouncilMrs Gladys Row Fogo Charitable Trust
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)CognitionNeuroscienceAtrophySuperior frontal gyrusPsychologyBrain sizeCognitive psychologyMedicineInternal medicineMagnetic resonance imagingCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Metabolic alterations to the superior frontal gyrus (SFG) have been linked to cognitive decline. Whether these indicate structural atrophy, which could be screened for at a larger scale using noninvasive structural imaging, is unknown. METHODS: We assessed annual structural magnetic resonance imaging scans and cognitive data from 3 consecutive years from 204 participants from the AD Neuroimaging Initiative database (mean age 72.24 [8.175] years). We evaluated associations between brain structural changes and performance in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Everyday Cognition Visuospatial subtest (ECog Visuospatial), and Functional Assessment Questionnaire. RESULTS: < .05), but an inconsistent pattern of association was found between the 2-year global brain atrophy progression and changes in the outcome from the three cognitive tests selected. DISCUSSION: The extent into which (and if) changes in the SFG influence cognition warrant further evaluation in a larger period in more heterogeneous population.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.337 · 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

Citations17
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia Diagnosis Assessment & Disease MonitoringSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207