Plasma Tau and Amyloid Are Not Reliably Related to Injury Characteristics, Neuropsychological Performance, or White Matter Integrity in Service Members with a History of Traumatic Brain Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between plasma tau and amyloid beta-42 (Aβ42), neuropsychological functioning, and white matter integrity in U.S. military service members with ( n = 155) and without ( n = 42) a history of uncomplicated mild ( n = 83), complicated mild ( n = 26), or moderate, severe, or penetrating ( n = 46) traumatic brain injury (TBI). We hypothesized that higher levels of tau and Aβ42 would be related to reduced neurocognitive performance and white matter integrity. Participants were enrolled prospectively from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. Participants completed a blood draw, neuropsychological assessment, and diffusion tensor imaging (General Electric 3T) of the whole brain. From 20 neuropsychological test scores, five cognitive domain scores were computed. Measures of fractional anisotropy (FA), mean diffusivity (MD), axial diffusivity (AD), and radial diffusivity (RD) were generated for 18 regions of interest (ROIs). There was no relationship found between the plasma biomarkers and neurocognitive performance in any of the three TBI groups (all ps >0.05; all R 2 changes <0.146). Although not reaching statistical significance after correction for multiple comparisons, higher tau and Aβ42 tended to be related to higher FA and lower MD, RD, and AD in patients with a history of moderate, severe, or penetrating TBI. There was no consistent relationship between either of the biomarkers and white matter integrity in the complicated and uncomplicated mild TBI groups. In addition, there was no significant relationship between the biomarkers and age, education, sex, race, bodily injury severity, time since injury, TBI severity, or number of TBIs (all ps >0.15). Future investigation in larger samples of moderate, severe, and penetrating TBI are needed. Other plasma biomarkers, including phosphorylated tau, exosomal tau, and interleukin-10, may be more promising measures to use in the diagnosis, management, and treatment of TBI.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".