Associations between white matter hyperintensities and cognitive dysfunction in Alzheimer’s, vascular and mixed dementias
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Increased burden of white‐matter hyperintensities (WMHs) on MRI is common among different types of dementia. WMHs can be caused by various underlying etiologies and are non‐specific markers of tissue abnormality. Therefore, global measures such as WMH burdens may not distinguish between degrees of cognitive impairment. We explored the associations between lobar‐specific WMH volumes and cognitive dysfunction across different dementia subtypes. Method N=57 participants (7 Alzheimer’s disease [AD]/5 subcortical vascular dementia [SVaD]/7 mixed dementia [MixD]/38 vascular cognitive impairment [VCI]; Sex:34M/23F; Age:73±8yrs; pooled from three independent studies) were scanned on 3T MRI. WMHs were segmented on 3D‐FLAIR (MixD/AD/SVaD) or dual‐echo PD/T2‐weighted (VCI) images. T1‐weighted images were processed with Freesurfer 6.0. Left and right frontal, temporal, occipital and parietal lobes plus basal ganglia volumes were constructed using the Freesurfer segmentation outputs. We calculated the proportion of WMH burden within each lobe, i.e. the ratio of lobar WMH volume over the lobar volume. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was used as a measure of cognitive function. We used a general linear model to determine the association between the WMH/lobar volume ratios and the MoCA scores. Covariates included age, sex, and presence of AD‐related (yes for MixD/AD, no for rest) and vascular‐related conditions (yes for SVaD/VCI/MixD, no for AD). Additionally, we assessed the relationship between the MoCA scores and the ratio of total WMH burden over the whole‐brain parenchymal volume. Result The model yielded a significant association between the MoCA scores and WMH/lobar ratios within the left (p=0.031) and the right (p=0.035) frontal lobes, with higher ratios predicting lower MoCA scores. The effect was not significant within the temporal, occipital, parietal lobes and the basal ganglia. The effect was insignificant at the whole‐brain level (p=0.08). Conclusion We found a significant association between the frontal lobe WMH burden and the MoCA scores, especially sensitive to frontal executive functions. This suggests that region‐specific assessments of WMHs may provide improved imaging‐cognitive correlations over the global WMH burden. Future studies with more consistent imaging protocols and broader cognitive/clinical assessments are warranted to further characterize the relationship between WMHs and cognitive impairment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".