MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3110640817 · doi:10.1101/2020.11.30.20241117

Dedifferentiation of memory-related brain function as a potential early biomarker of Alzheimer’s disease in asymptomatic older women: Results from the PREVENT-AD Cohort

2020· preprint· en· W3110640817 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sheida Rabipour, Sricharana Rajagopal, Stamatoula Pasvanis, M. Natasha Rajah

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteDouglas College
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPfizer CanadaGovernment of CanadaMcGill UniversityPfizer
KeywordsEpisodic memoryPsychologyContext (archaeology)CohortDevelopmental psychologyCognitionNeuroscienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Late-onset Alzheimer’s disease (AD) disproportionately affects women compared to men. Episodic memory decline is one of the earliest and most pronounced deficits observed in AD. However, it remains unclear whether there are sex differences in episodic memory-related brain function in cognitively intact older adults at risk of developing AD. In the current study, we used task fMRI to test for sex differences in episodic memory-related brain activity and brain activity-behavior correlations in cognitively intact older adults with a family history of AD from the PREVENT-AD cohort study in Montreal, Canada (M age =63.03±3.78; M education =15.41±3.40). Importantly, we tested women and men who were matched in age, body mass index, years of education, and proximity to the age of parental AD onset. We used data-driven task-based multivariate partial least squares (PLS) analysis to identify sex differences in brain activity during the successful encoding and retrieval of objects and their associated spatial context. We used behavior PLS to examine sex differences in the correlations between brain activity and memory performance at encoding and retrieval. Our results suggested no significant sex differences in behavioral performance on the memory task. Yet, we observed sex differences in task-related brain activity and in brain activity-behavior correlations during the encoding of object-location associative memories and object-only item memory, and the retrieval of object only item memories. Specifically, subsequent object-location associative retrieval associated with encoding related activation of caudate, cingulate, and middle occipital cortex in women and, additionally, of temporo-parietal regions in men. We also found male-specific activations in ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (PFC) and insula during associated with the encoding and retrieval of object-only information. Moreover, whereas activity in ventrolateral PFC, posterior cingulate, and inferior parietal regions during encoding supported subsequent performance in women, activity in these regions during retrieval supported object-location associative memory in men. Similarly, we found that activity in ventrolateral PFC, precuneus, parahippocampal, anterior cingulate, and occipital regions during retrieval supported general memory performance in women but object-only retrieval in men. Our findings suggest functional dedifferentiation of episodic memory-related brain activation and performance in women compared to men. Follow up analyses should test for sex differences in the relationship between brain activity patterns and performance longitudinally, in association with risk factors for AD development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→