MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3191773668 · doi:10.3390/brainsci11081010

Volumetry of Olfactory Structures in Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer’s Disease: A Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis

2021· review· en· W3191773668 on OpenAlexafffund
Benoît Jobin, Benjamin Boller, Johannes Frasnelli

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Sciences · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicOlfactory and Sensory Function Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMeta-analysisCognitive impairmentAtrophyAlzheimer's diseaseOlfactionDementiaDiseaseOlfactory systemCognitionCognitive declinePsychologyNeuroscienceAudiologyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Olfactory decline is an early symptom of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and is a predictor of conversion from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to AD. Olfactory decline could reflect AD-related atrophy of structures related to the sense of smell. The aim of this study was to verify whether the presence of a clinical diagnosis of AD or MCI is associated with a volumetric decrease in the olfactory bulbs (OB) and the primary olfactory cortex (POC). We conducted two systematic reviews, one for each region and a meta-analysis. We collected articles from PsychNet, PubMed, Ebsco, and ProQuest databases. Results showed large and heterogeneous effects indicating smaller OB volumes in patients with AD (k = 6, g = −1.21, 95% CI [−2.19, −0.44]) and in patients with MCI compared to controls. There is also a trend for smaller POC in patients with AD or MCI compared to controls. Neuroanatomical structures involved in olfactory processing are smaller in AD and these volumetric reductions could be measured as early as the MCI stage.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.928
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.448
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.043 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations40
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain SciencesSame topicOlfactory and Sensory Function StudiesFrench-language works237,207