P2‐475: THE NEUROBEHAVIOR PROFILE OF CLINICAL DEMENTIA WITH TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURIES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prior studies have established a dementia-traumatic brain injury (D-TBI)-dementia relationship in case control or cohort studies. Moderate-to-severe TBIs predispose to an early age of onset of dementia with mixed pathologies that are beyond the chronic traumatic encephalopathy from repeated mild TBIs. A major gap in our knowledge is a lack of characterization of the clinical syndrome of D-TBI, particularly in comparison to Alzheimer's disease (AD), such that clinicians can consider D-TBI on clinical evaluation. In a retrospective study, we evaluated a large cohort of patients with early-onset dementia (<65 years of age) and determined the number who had self or caregiver reports of TBI. We then compared their records for performance on intake neuropsychological measures. Among 273 early-onset dementia patients, 24 had a history of TBIs for a total of 8.8% (no gender or education differences). When comparing these 24 (age 56.3±1.2; Montreal Cognitive Assessment [MoCA] 17.4±1.2) patients with the remaining 249 (age 59.1±4.8; MoCA 18.4±5.5) without a history of TBI, those with TBI were worse on digit span backwards, symbol search, digit symbol coding, trails b time, “FAS” fluency, animal fluency, and California Verbal Learning Test Long Delay Recall. These findings strongly suggest a cognitive effect of prior TBI and a specific clinical dementia syndrome of D-TBI which may be distinct from AD. Much more research is needed to define the clinical relationship of TBI to dementia, regardless of neuropathology.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".