Predicting time to dementia using a quantitative template of disease progression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Characterization of longitudinal trajectories of biomarkers implicated in sporadic Alzheimer's disease (AD) in decades before clinical diagnosis is important for disease prevention and monitoring. Methods We used a multivariate Bayesian model to temporally align 1369 Alzheimer's disease Neuroimaging Initiative participants based on the similarity of their longitudinal biomarker measures and estimated a quantitative template of the temporal evolution of cerebrospinal fluid A , p‐ , and t‐tau and hippocampal volume, brain glucose metabolism, and cognitive measurements. We computed biomarker trajectories as a function of time to AD dementia and predicted AD dementia onset age in a disjoint sample. Results Quantitative template showed early changes in verbal memory, cerebrospinal fluid Aβ 1–42 and p‐tau 181p , and hippocampal volume. Mean error in predicted AD dementia onset age was years. Discussion Our method provides a quantitative approach for characterizing the natural history of AD starting at preclinical stages despite the lack of individual‐level longitudinal data spanning the entire disease timeline.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".