MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparative study on neuropsychological tests for typical Alzheimer's disease, frontal variant of Alzheimer's disease and behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia

2017· article· en· W3030395681 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shuling Liu, Zhihong Shi, Ying Wang, Shuai Liu, Li Cai, Tong Han, Yuying Zhou, Yong Ji

Bibliographic record

VenueZhonghua laonian yixue zazhi · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrontotemporal dementiaNeuropsychologyMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMedicineDisinhibitionDementiaAlzheimer's diseaseNeuropsychological testPsychologyCognitionPsychiatryAudiologyInternal medicineClinical psychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To compare the neuropsychological features and other clinical and imaging characteristics among patients with typical Alzheimer's disease (TAD), frontal variant Alzheimer's disease (fvAD) and behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). Methods Neuropsychological scales were used to evaluate the cognitive function and neuropsychiatric symptoms of nine patients with fvAD, 30 patients with bvFTD and 32 patients with typical AD (TAD). The apolipoprotein E (ApoE) e4 allele and brain imaging techniques, including the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), 11C-Pittsburgh compound B positron emission tomography (PIB-PET), and 18F-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET), were used for the differential diagnosis of fvAD and bvFTD. Results There were no significant differences in general cognitive function or daily activity in patients among the three groups.However, the cognitive subscale scores of Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scale, including visual acuity and executive function, delayed recall, and orientation, were significantly different among the groups (Z=7.891, P=0.035; Z=7.412, P=0.031; Z=6.437, P=0.043, respectively). The clock drawing test (CDT) score of TAD group was higher than that in the bvFTD and fvAD groups (Z=8.673, P=0.020), while the neuropsychological questionnaire (NPI) scores of the bvFTD and fvAD groups were higher than those of the TAD group (Z=7.577, P=0.023). Meanwhile, the incidences of agitation, disinhibition and abnormal behavior of NPI in the bvFTD and fvAD groups were higher than those in the TAD group (χ2=11.139, P=0.004; χ2=6.481, P=0.039; χ2=6.812, P=0.033, respectively). The frequencies of the ApoE e4 allele were 44.4% in the fvAD group and 33.3% in the bvFTD group, which were not significant different from that in the TAD group (40.6%). Furthermore, patients in the fvAD group were associated with decreased regional cerebral glucose metabolism and amyloid deposition in the temporal-parietal cortex evaluated by FDG-PET and PIB-PET. Conclusions Neuropsychological evaluation is valuable for the differential diagnosis of TAD, fvAD and bvFTD.The frequencies of the ApoEe4 allele are similar among the three groups.FDG-PET and PIB-PET imaging plays an important role in the diagnosis of variant types of Alzheimer's disease. Key words: Alzheimer disease; Frontal lobe; Dementia; Neuropsychological tests; Apolipoprotein E4; Positron-emission tomography

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.225
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.144
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZhonghua laonian yixue zazhiSame topicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207