Comparison of sporadic and familial behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (FTD) in a North American cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) may present sporadically or due to an autosomal dominant mutation. Characterization of both forms will improve understanding of the generalizability of assessments and treatments. METHODS: A total of 135 sporadic (s-bvFTD; mean age 63.3 years; 34% female) and 99 familial (f-bvFTD; mean age 59.9; 48% female) bvFTD participants were identified. f-bvFTD cases included 43 with known or presumed chromosome 9 open reading frame 72 (C9orf72) gene expansions, 28 with known or presumed microtubule-associated protein tau (MAPT) mutations, 14 with known progranulin (GRN) mutations, and 14 with a strong family history of FTD but no identified mutation. RESULTS: Participants with f-bvFTD were younger and had earlier age at onset. s-bvFTD had higher total Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI-Q) scores due to more frequent endorsement of depression and irritability. DISCUSSION: f-bvFTD and s-bvFTD cases are clinically similar, suggesting the generalizability of novel biomarkers, therapies, and clinical tools developed in either form to the other.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".