Amnestic and non‐amnestic symptoms of dementia: An international study of Alzheimer's disease in people with Down's syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presence of age-related neuropathology characteristic of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in people with Down syndrome (DS) is well-established. However, the early symptoms of dementia may be atypical and appear related to dysfunction of prefrontal circuitry. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the initial informant reported age-related neuropsychiatric symptoms of dementia in people with DS, and their relationship to AD and frontal lobe function. METHODS: Non-amnestic informant reported symptoms (disinhibition, apathy, and executive dysfunction) and amnestic symptoms from the CAMDEX-DS informant interview were analyzed in a cross-sectional cohort of 162 participants with DS over 30 years of age, divided into three groups: stable cognition, prodromal dementia, and AD. To investigate age-related symptoms prior to evidence of prodromal dementia we stratified the stable cognition group by age. RESULTS: Amnestic and non-amnestic symptoms were present before evidence of informant-reported cognitive decline. In those who received the diagnosis of AD, symptoms tended to be more marked. Memory impairments were more marked in the prodromal dementia than the stable cognition group (OR = 35.07; P < .001), as was executive dysfunction (OR = 7.16; P < .001). Disinhibition was greater in the AD than in the prodromal dementia group (OR = 3.54; P = .04). Apathy was more pronounced in the AD than in the stable cognition group (OR = 34.18; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Premorbid amnestic and non-amnestic symptoms as reported by informants increase with the progression to AD. For the formal diagnosis of AD in DS this progression of symptoms needs to be taken into account. An understanding of the unique clinical presentation of DS in AD should inform treatment options.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".