Astrocyte Biomarkers in Alzheimer Disease
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<h3>Objective</h3> To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether fluid and imaging astrocyte biomarkers are altered in Alzheimer disease (AD). <h3>Methods</h3> PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched for articles reporting fluid or imaging astrocyte biomarkers in AD. Pooled effect sizes were determined with standardized mean differences (SMDs) using the Hedge G method with random effects to determine biomarker performance. Adapted questions from the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies were applied for quality assessment. A protocol for this study has been previously registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020192304). <h3>Results</h3> The initial search identified 1,425 articles. After exclusion criteria were applied, 33 articles (a total of 3,204 individuals) measuring levels of glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), S100B, chitinase-3-like protein 1 (YKL-40), and aquaporin 4 in the blood and CSF, as well as monoamine oxidase-B indexed by PET <sup>11</sup>C-deuterium-l-deprenyl, were included. GFAP (SMD 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71–1.18) and YKL-40 (SMD 0.76, 95% CI 0.63–0.89) levels in the CSF and S100B levels in the blood (SMD 2.91, 95% CI 1.01–4.8) were found to be significantly increased in patients with AD. <h3>Conclusions</h3> Despite significant progress, applications of astrocyte biomarkers in AD remain in their early days. This meta-analysis demonstrated that astrocyte biomarkers are consistently altered in AD and supports further investigation for their inclusion in the AD clinical research framework for observational and interventional studies.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it