Prognosis of amnestic mild cognitive impairment: clinical and immunological correlations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the long-term (three-year) prognosis of the cognitive deficits progression in elderly people with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) based on the analysis of the initial clinical and immunological parameters. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study is based on a clinical and follow-up study of 252 outpatients with aMCI, who were observed in the Federal State Budgetary Scientific Institution «Mental Health Research Center» from 2018 to 2020. The psychometric assessment complex included the following scales and tests: MMSE, MoCA, The 10 words test, BNT, David Wechsler's Scale, subtest 6, CDT, Memory test of 5 geometric shapes, BVRT Test, DRS - Mattis Dementia Rating Scale: Verbal fluency, DRS - Mattis Dementia Rating Scale, The Munsterberg Test. As part of the study, the level of cytokines (TNF-a, IL-1, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10) in the blood serum was determined in all patients by enzyme immunoassay (ELISA), using diagnostic kits manufactured by Cytokine LLC. RESULTS: In patients with a progression of aMCI syndrome, an increase in proinflammatory cytokines IL-1, IL-6, IL-8, TNF-α is initially detected, which may reflect the level of systemic inflammation or functional insufficiency of anti-inflammatory mechanisms. In turn, the group with a subsequent improvement in cognitive functioning, on the contrary, is distinguished by an initially increased level of the anti-inflammatory interleukin system (IL-10). CONCLUSION: We provide new data on the presence of systemic inflammation and immune disturbances and their association with clinical course of disease in the majority of elderly patients with aMCI. CONCLUSION: Signs of a chronic low-level systemic inflammatory response in patients with aMCI is the unfavorable prognosis criterion: in such patients, cognitive deficit significantly progresses or dementia due to Alzheimer disease develops within three years.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".