MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Clinical relevance of the brain morphometric indicators for the Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis

2020· article· en· W3137932932 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elena Kolupaeva, I. A. ZHUKOVA, N. G. ZHUKOVA, И. В. Толмачев, O. Izhboldina, Yu. S. Mironova, A. V. Latypova

Bibliographic record

VenuePractical medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroimagingDementiaNeuropsychologyMagnetic resonance imagingAlzheimer's diseaseWhite matterMedicineDiseaseBrain sizePsychologyInternal medicinePsychiatryCognitionRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose — to study the morphometric data of the brain in patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) as a possible additional instrumental paraclinical neuroimaging marker to verify the accuracy of the diagnosis. Material and methods. We examined 27 patients with Alzheimer’s disease: 14 (51,9%) men and 13 (45,1%) women, average age 74,5 ± 8,7 years with a probable diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease, anamnestic type. All patients received standard combination therapy with anti-dementia drugs. The patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging of the brain, followed by automated image segmentation and neuropsychological examination using the Montreal scale for assessing cognitive functions. Results. In our study, no statistically significant correlations were found between the data of neuropsychological testing, educational level, age, gender, and volumes of gray and white matter of the brain. Conclusion. According to the study, indicators of the volume of gray and white matter of the brain are not recommended as an additional neuroimaging marker of AD.

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)0.127
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.127
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.213
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePractical medicineSame topicNeurological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207