Financial Management Skills in Aging, MCI and Dementia: Cross Sectional Relationship to 18F-Florbetapir PET Cortical β-amyloid Deposition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a need to more fully characterize financial capacity losses in the preclinical and prodromal stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and their pathological substrates. OBJECTIVES: To test the association between financial skills and cortical β-amyloid deposition in aging and subjects at risk for AD. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analyses of data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI-3) study conducted across 50 plus sites in the US and Canada. SETTING: Multicenter biomarker study. PARTICIPANTS: 243 subjects (144 cognitively normal, 79 mild cognitive impairment [MCI], 20 mild AD). MEASUREMENTS: 18F-Florbetapir brain PET scans to measure global cortical β-amyloid deposition (SUVr) and the Financial Capacity Instrument Short Form (FCI-SF) to evaluate an individual's financial skills in monetary calculation, financial concepts, checkbook/register usage, and bank statement usage. There are five sub scores and a total score (range of 0-74) with higher scores indicating better financial skill. RESULTS: FCI-SF total score was significantly worse in MCI [Cohen's d= 0.9 (95%CI: 0.6-1.2)] and AD subjects [Cohen's d=3.1(CI: 2.5-3.7)] compared to normals. Domain scores and completion times also showed significant difference. Across all subjects, higher cortical β-amyloid SUVr was significantly associated with worse FCI-SF total score after co-varying for age, education, and cognitive score [Cohen's f2=0.751(CI: 0.5-1.1)]. In cognitively normal subjects, after covarying for age, gender, and education, higher β -amyloid PET SUVr was associated with longer task completion time [Cohen's f2=0.198(CI: 0.06-0.37)]. CONCLUSION: Using a multicenter study sample, we document that financial capacity is impaired in the prodromal and mild stages of AD and that such impairments are, in part, associated with the extent of cortical β-amyloid deposition. In normal aging, β-amyloid deposition is associated with slowing of financial tasks. These data confirm and extend prior research highlighting the utility of financial capacity assessments in at risk samples.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".