MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Auditory Event-related Potentials in Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer’s Disease

2018· review· en· W2903280503 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Alzheimer Research · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsBruyèreUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCognitive impairmentEvent-related potentialDiseaseAudiologyNeuroscienceCognitionPsychologyAlzheimer's diseaseMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mild cognitive deficits are more likely to occur with increasing age, and become more pronounced for people diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD). Conventional methods to identify cognitive declines (i.e., neuropsychological testing and clinical judgment) can lead to false positive diagnoses of cognitive impairment. Tools such as electroencephalography (EEG) offer additional measures of cognitive processing, indexing the electrophysiological changes associated with aging, MCI and AD. OBJECTIVE: We reviewed the literature on EEG to determine if auditory event-related potentials (ERPs) could distinguish between healthy aging, MCI, and AD. METHOD: We searched two electronic databases (Medline and PyscInfo) for articles published between January 2005 and April 2017. Articles were considered for review if they included: i) participants 60 years of age or older; ii) healthy older adults or those diagnosed with MCI or AD; iii) at least one auditory elicited ERP component. RESULTS: Our search revealed 1532 articles (800 after removing duplicates); 719 were excluded through title/abstract review, and of the 81 remaining articles, 30 satisfied inclusion criteria. All studies compared cognitive function between at least two of the three selected populations. Our findings suggest that the P300 and N200 components may distinguish between healthy cognitive aging, MCI, and AD. CONCLUSION: ERPs may be sensitive to progressive cognitive changes due to MCI and AD. The P300 and N200 may help identify patients who are likely to progress from MCI to AD, and could be a valuable clinical tool.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.400
GPT teacher head0.506
Teacher spread0.107 · 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