Amyloid β influences the relationship between cortical thickness and vascular load
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cortical thickness has been proposed as a biomarker of Alzheimer's disease (AD)- related neurodegeneration, but the nature of its relationship with amyloid beta (Aβ) deposition and white matter hyperintensity volume (WMHV) in cognitively normal adults is unclear. METHODS: F-Florbetapir positron emission tomography (PET) and structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Two previously defined Alzheimer's disease (AD) cortical signature regions and the major cortical lobes were selected as regions of interest (ROIs) for cortical thickness. RESULTS: Higher WMHV, but not Aβ status, predicted lower cortical thickness across all participants, in all ROIs. Conversely, when Aβ-positive participants were considered alone, higher WMHV predicted higher cortical thickness in a temporal AD-signature region. DISCUSSION: WMHV may differentially influence cortical thickness depending on the presence or absence of Aβ, potentially reflecting different pathological mechanisms.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".