MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2981095841 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2019.06.3424

P3‐391: AMYLOID‐β DEPOSITION AND NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL PROFILE IN ELDERLY WITH SUBJECTIVE COGNITIVE DECLINE AND SUPERAGERS: PRELIMINARY RESULTS

2019· article· en· W2981095841 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adalberto Studart‐Neto, Artur Martins Coutinho, Camila de Godoi Carneiro, Mateus Rozalem Aranha, Natália Cristina Moraes, Mário Amore Cecchini, Raphael Ribeiro Spera, Letizia G. Borges, Conrado Regis Borges, Mônica Sanches Yassuda, Sônia Maria Dozzi Brucki, Cláudia da Costa Leite, Carlos Alberto Buchpiguel, Ricardo Nitríni

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentClinical Dementia RatingCognitive declineDementiaNeuropsychologyCognitionAtrophyMedicinePsychologyAudiologyInternal medicineGerontologyPsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Subjective cognitive decline (SCD) is a potential risk factor for dementia. On the other hand, the group recently known as “SuperAgers” (SA), elderly aged 80+ who have a memory equivalent to 20–30 years younger, present greater resilience to age-related cortical atrophy. Objective is to analyze and compare amyloid-β(Aβ) depositionandneuropsychological profile ofhealthy controls (HC), SCD and SA. SCD was defined by using a questionnaire for memory decline; for the diagnosis of SA it was required a performance at or above average normative values for individuals in their 50-60s in delayed recall score of the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test. Participants of the three groups were evaluated with the Clinical Dementia Rating scale (CDR), Mini Mental Status Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Brief Cognitive Screening Battery and a standard neuropsychological battery. Images of 11C-PIB were acquired in a hybrid PET/MR equipment and analyzed individually using cross-sectional images and with 3D-SSP methodology. For the between-groups comparison, we used the SPM8 software. Sixty-two elderly individuals (49 females) were included, being 17 HC, 37 SCD and eight SA. For the whole sample, mean age and schooling were 71.2 (±6.6) and 14.5 (±4.9) years, respectively. Differences were found between groups in the MoCA (SCD 24.1±2.2vs HC 25.4 ±2.5 vs SA 26.6 ±1.9, p = 0.01), but no MMSE (SCD 28.8 ±0.9 vs HC 29.1 ±0.9 vs SA 29.2 ±1.2, p = 0.338). There were no significant differences in other specific cognitive tests between SCD and HC. SCD exhibited no significant differences in Aβdeposition positivity when compared with HC (9/17 vs. 3/36, respectively). Unexpectedly, five from seven SA presented positive amyloid in visual analysis. In the comparison of age-adjusted groups, SA remained as the group with the greatest accumulation of amyloid. There was a higher prevalence in cortical amyloid deposition in SA in relation to other groups, but the small sample still limits the biomarker comparison between groups. The preliminary results suggest isolated amyloidosis is insufficient to lead to cognitive decline. This ongoing study is still recruiting volunteers.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.279 · 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→