MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2980975247 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2019.06.996

P1‐391: EVIDENCE FOR A QUADRATIC RELATION BETWEEN ACTIVATION AND NEURODEGENERATION IN THE PRODROMAL PHASE OF ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE

2019· article· en· W2980975247 on OpenAlexaff
Nick Corriveau‐Lecavalier, Simon Duchesne, Serge Gauthier, Carol Hudon, Marie‐Jeanne Kergoat, Natasha Rajah, Samira Mellah, Sylvie Belleville

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteDouglas CollegeUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de QuébecUniversité LavalUniversité du QuébecInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurodegenerationNeuroscienceHippocampusProdromeAlzheimer's diseasePsychologyCognitive declineHippocampal formationMedicineAudiologyDiseaseDementiaCardiologyInternal medicinePsychiatryPsychosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been proposed that neuronal activation follows an inverse U-shape trajectory during the prodromal phase of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Hyperactivation, i.e., larger activation in patients than in cognitively unimpaired controls (CU), would be observed in the early phase of the prodrome when neurodegeneration is mild, then followed by hypoactivation as structural damage increases with disease progression. This was tested by comparing linear and quadratic models to examine the function that best characterizes the relationship between neurodegeneration and activation in prodromal AD. The study included 59 CU subjects and 54 considered at-risk of AD based on either meeting criteria for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or because they presented with complaint and worry about their memory although they were cognitively unimpaired, as well as a smaller hippocampal volume and/or were ApoE4 positive (subjective cognitive decline+, SCD). Functional MRI activation was measured while subjects memorized 78 pictures and their location in a four-position grid. Significance of R change between linear and quadratic models was assessed to determine which model best fits the relationship between neurodegeneration (hippocampal volume/cortical thickness) and activation in the hippocampus and cortical regions vulnerable to AD. This was done separately for the at-risk and CU groups. In the presence of a significant model, follow-up ANOVAs were used to assess activation differences between SCD, MCI and CUs groups. A quadratic model was significant between mean cortical thickness and activation in the left superior parietal lobule and a linear negative model was significant between left hippocampal volume and activation in the left hippocampus and in the right inferior temporal lobe in the at-risk group but not in CUs. ANOVAs indicated larger levels of activation in SCD than CU in the left superior parietal lobule, left hippocampus and right inferior temporal lobe and lower levels of activation in MCI than in CU in the left superior parietal lobule. Parietal activation follows an inverse U-shape as a function of neurodegeneration in prodromal AD, with hyperactivation in SCD and hypoactivation in MCI. Our data suggests that task-related hyperactivation might represent an early biomarker of AD and could help identify individuals in its prodromal phase.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→