Investigating the Contribution of White Matter Hyperintensities and Cortical Thickness to Empathy in Neurodegenerative and Cerebrovascular Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Change in empathy is an increasingly recognised symptom of neurodegenerative diseases and contributes to caregiver burden and patient distress. Empathy impairment has been associated with brain atrophy but its relationship to white matter hyperintensities (WMH) is unknown. We aimed to investigate the relationships amongst WMH, brain atrophy, and empathy deficits in neurodegenerative and cerebrovascular diseases. Methods: 513 participants with Alzheimer’s Disease/Mild Cognitive Impairment, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Frontotemporal Dementia (FTD), Parkinson’s Disease, or Cerebrovascular Disease (CVD) were included. Empathy was assessed using the Interpersonal Reactivity Index. WMH were measured using a semi-automatic segmentation and FreeSurfer was used to measure cortical thickness. Results: A heterogeneous pattern of cortical thinning was found between groups, with FTD showing thinning in frontotemporal regions and CVD in left superior parietal, left insula, and left postcentral. Results from both univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that several variables were associated with empathy, particularly cortical thickness in the fronto-insulo-temporal and cingulate regions, sex(female), global cognition, and right parietal and occipital WMH. Conclusions: Our results suggest that cortical atrophy and WMH may be associated with empathy deficits in neurodegenerative and cerebrovascular diseases. Future work should consider investigating the longitudinal effects of WMH and atrophy on empathy deficits in neurodegenerative and cerebrovascular diseases.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".