Are there consistent abnormalities in event‐related EEG oscillations in patients with Alzheimer’s disease compared to other diseases belonging to dementia?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cerebrospinal and structural-molecular neuroimaging in-vivo biomarkers are recommended for diagnostic purposes in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other dementias; however, they do not explain the effects of AD neuropathology on neurophysiological mechanisms underpinning cognitive processes. Here, an Expert Panel from the Electrophysiology Professional Interest Area of the Alzheimer's Association reviewed the field literature and reached consensus on the event-related electroencephalographic oscillations (EROs) that show consistent abnormalities in patients with significant cognitive deficits due to Alzheimer's, Parkinson's (PD), Lewy body (LBD), and cerebrovascular diseases. Converging evidence from oddball paradigms showed that, as compared to cognitively unimpaired (CU) older adults, AD patients had lower amplitude in widespread delta (>4 Hz) and theta (4-7 Hz) phase-locked EROs as a function of disease severity. Similar effects were also observed in PD, LBD, and/or cerebrovascular cognitive impairment patients. Non-phase-locked alpha (8-12 Hz) and beta (13-30 Hz) oscillations were abnormally reduced (event-related desynchronization, ERD) in AD patients relative to CU. However, studies on patients with other dementias remain lacking. Delta and theta phase-locked EROs during oddball tasks may be useful neurophysiological biomarkers of cognitive systems at work in heuristic and intervention clinical trials performed in AD patients, but more research is needed regarding their potential role for other dementias.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".