MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3111506004 · doi:10.1002/alz.045848

Psychiatric symptoms in the early detection and differential diagnosis of FTD

2020· article· en· W3111506004 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Ducharme

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrontotemporal dementiaProdromePsychiatryNeuroimagingDementiaMedicineDiseaseClinical psychologyPsychologyPsychosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The early symptoms of behavioral‐variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) have considerable overlap with the common primary psychiatric disorders like major depression and psychotic disorders. Consequently, about 50% are diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder before the identification of bvFTD. While this can be due to inadequate recognition of bvFTD features and lack of expertise, the diagnostic effort is also complicated by the fact that psychiatric symptoms like delusions and hallucinations are sometimes the prodrome to bvFTD—particularly in familial cases. Whereas the reliability of Alzheimer’s disease diagnoses has improved with the advent of molecular biomarkers, the diagnosis of bvFTD remains primarily based on clinical assessment and neuroimaging. The need for a systematic approach to distinguish bvFTD from psychiatric disorders is addressed in recommendations recently developed by an internal panel of experts, the Neuropsychiatric International Consortium for FTD, and are reviewed in this presentation. Method The Neuropsychiatric International Consortium for FTD was convened to develop recommendations for a diagnosis approach for identifying bvFTD in individuals with midlife‐onset (>45 years) behavior change. The consensus process included a systematic review of the literature to identify best practices, effective clinical measures and the utility of brain imaging. Result Differential diagnosis of bvFTD from psychiatric disorders is facilitated by comprehensive and chronologically‐ordered history, family history of neurodegenerative or neuromuscular disease, use of formal diagnostic criteria for bvFTD and for psychiatric disorders, use of bedside measures of general cognition and social behavior, psychiatric scales and brain imaging. These have been incorporated into an algorithm to facilitate use of the recommendations. Conclusion A systematic approach to the clinical examination can be facilitate the differential of bvFTD from primary psychiatric disorders. This is valuable for providing timely diagnosis, and early counseling and treatment planning to patients, for facilitating testing of novel treatments in clinical trials—and will also facilitate proper treatment for patients with primary and secondary psychiatric states.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→