Demographic and psychosocial factors associated with the decision to learn mutation status in familial frontotemporal dementia and the impact of disclosure on mood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Up to 30% of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) cases are due to known pathogenic mutations (f‐FTD). Little is known about the factors that predict who will choose to learn their results. Upcoming clinical trials in f‐FTD may require disclosure prior to enrollment, even before symptom onset, and thus characterizing this sample is important. Furthermore, understanding the mood impacts of genetic disclosure may guide genetic counseling practice. Method F‐FTD participants (n=568) from families with a known pathogenic mutation (MAPT, C9orf72, GRN) were enrolled through the ARTFL/LEFFTDS Longitudinal FTD Study (ALLFTD) and provided the opportunity for disclosure. Independent‐sample t‐tests compared demographic and psychosocial factors between participants who did and did not receive their results. In participants who were asymptomatic at baseline and follow up (n=199,177 with follow‐up), linear mixed effects modeling was used to investigate pre‐ to post‐disclosure changes in the 15‐item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS). Result Of participants from families with a known pathogenic genetic mutation, 47% received genetic disclosure. Of the asymptomatic subset (n=386), 36% know their mutation status. Of these asymptomatic learners, 46% received disclosure through the study, and the remainder learned their genetic status prior to study enrollment. None of the analyzed demographic or psychosocial factors (i.e., sex, age, education, having children) differed between learners and non‐learners (p’s > 0.05). In the longitudinal analysis of asymptomatic participants, learners showed a pre‐ to post‐increase of 0.31 GDS points/year (95%CI: ‐0.08, 0.69, p = 0.12), whereas non‐learners showed a slight decline (‐0.15 points/year, 95%CI: ‐0.36, 0.06, p = 0.16). This difference between slopes was statistically significant (0.46, 95%CI: 0.02, 0.89, p=0.04) but represents a small clinical effect. In asymptomatic learners, slopes did not differ based on mutation status (0.28, 95%CI: ‐0.66, 1.20, p=0.55). Conclusions were based on the estimates and full range of confidence intervals. Conclusion The majority of asymptomatic research participants do not know their genetic status, which will be a consideration for clinical trials that require disclosure. No considered demographic factors were strongly associated with the decision to receive disclosure. The findings suggest that disclosure in asymptomatic participants has minimal impact on depressive symptoms regardless of genetic results.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".