Hearing loss is associated with gray matter differences in older adults at risk for and with Alzheimer’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Using data from the COMPASS-ND study we investigated associations between hearing loss and hippocampal volume as well as cortical thickness in older adults with subjective cognitive decline (SCD), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and Alzheimer’s dementia (AD). SCD participants with greater pure-tone HL exhibited lower hippocampal volume, but more cortical thickness in the left superior temporal gyrus and right pars opercularis. Greater speech-in-noise reception thresholds were associated with lower cortical thickness bilaterally across much of the cortex in AD. The AD group also showed a trend towards worse speech-in-noise thresholds compared to the SCD group. Highlights In SCD, greater pure-tone hearing loss was associated with lower right hippocampal volume. Pure-tone hearing loss was not associated with brain atrophy in MCI or AD. Individuals with AD exhibited a trend towards poorer speech-in-noise (SiN) thresholds than SCD. In AD, greater atrophy across large portions of the cortex was associated with greater SiN thresholds.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".