Altered mismatch response of inferior parietal lobule in amnestic mild cognitive impairment: A magnetoencephalographic study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mismatch negativity (MMN) reflects the functional integrity of sensory memory function. With the advantages of independence of individual's focused attention and behavioral cooperation, this neurophysiological signal is particularly suitable for investigating elderly with cognitive decline such as amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI). However, the existing results remain substantially inconsistent whether these patients show deficits of MMN. In order to reconcile the previous disputes, the present study used magnetoencephalography combined with distributed source imaging methods to determine the source-level magnetic mismatch negativity (MMNm) in aMCI. METHODS: A total of 26 healthy controls (HC) and 26 patients with aMCI underwent an auditory oddball paradigm during the MEG recordings. MMNm amplitudes and latencies in the bilateral superior temporal gyrus, inferior frontal gyrus, and inferior parietal lobule (IPL) were compared between HC and aMCI groups. The correlations of MMNm responses with performance of auditory/verbal memory tests were examined. Finally, MMNm and its combination with verbal/auditory memory tests were submitted to receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: Compared to HC, patients with aMCI showed significantly delayed MMNm latencies in the IPL. Among the patients with aMCI, longer MMNm latencies of left IPL were associated with lower scores of Chinese Version Verbal Learning Test (CVVLT). The ROC curve analysis revealed that the combination of MMNm latencies of left IPL and CVVLT scores yielded a moderate accuracy in the discrimination of aMCI from HC at an individual level. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest dysfunctional MMNm in patients with aMCI, particularly in the IPL.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".