Evidence of parietal hyperactivation in individuals with mild cognitive impairment who progressed to dementia: A longitudinal fMRI study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hyperactivation, which is defined as a higher level of activation in patients compared to cognitively unimpaired older adults (controls; CTL), might represent an early signature of Alzheimer's Disease (AD). The goal of this study was to assess the presence and location of hyperactivation in individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) who were later diagnosed with dementia, examine how hyperactivation changes longitudinally, and whether it is related to time before dementia. Forty participants, 26 with MCI and 14 CTL were enrolled in the study. Magnetic resonance imaging was used to measure functional activation while participants encoded word-pairs as well as cortical thickness and regional brain volume at study entry (Y0) and two years later (Y2). Clinical follow-up was completed every two years following study entry to identify progressors (pMCI), that is, individuals who later received a diagnosis of dementia. Task-related activation was assessed in pMCI in both hippocampi and in regions showing greater cortical thinning from Y0 to Y2 compared to CTLs. Hyperactivation was found in pMCI individuals in the right supramarginal gyrus. Persons with pMCI also showed hypoactivation in the left hippocampus and left pars opercularis. Both hyper- and hypoactivation were present at Y0 and Y2 and did not change longitudinally. Activation was not associated with time before dementia diagnosis. Smaller volume and thinner cortical thickness were associated with shorter time to diagnosis in the left hippocampus and left pars opercularis. In conclusion, hyperactivation was found in individuals who later progressed to dementia, confirming that it might represent an early biomarker to identify individuals in the prodromal phase of AD and that its understanding could contribute to elucidate the key brain mechanisms that precede dementia.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".