MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4220780393 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1451802/v1

Grey Matter Changes On Brain MRI In Subjective Cognitive Decline: A Systematic Review

2022· review· en· W4220780393 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pablo Arrondo, Oscar Elía‐Zudaire, Gloria Martí‐Andrés, María A. Fernández‐Seara, Mario Riverol

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrey matterVoxel-based morphometryEntorhinal cortexNeuropsychologyMagnetic resonance imagingMeta-analysisCognitionVoxelPsychologyNeuroimagingSample size determinationPopulationMedicineHippocampusNeurosciencePathologyStatisticsRadiologyMathematicsWhite matterEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: People with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) report cognitive deterioration. However, their performance in neuropsychological evaluation falls within the normal range. The present study aims to analyse whether structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reveals grey matter changes in SCD population compared with healthy normal controls (HC). Methods: Parallel systematic searches in PubMed and Web of science databases were conducted, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Quality assessment was completed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS)Results: 51 MRI studies were included. 35 studies used a region of interest (ROI) analysis, 15 used a voxel-based morphometry (VBM) analysis, and 10 studies used a cortical thickness (CTh) analysis. 10 studies combined both, VBM or CTh analysis with ROI analysis.Conclusions: Medial temporal structures, like the hippocampus or the entorhinal cortex (EC) seemed to present grey matter reduction in SCD compared with HC, but the samples and results are heterogeneous. Larger sample sizes could help to better determine if these grey matter changes are consistent in SCD subjects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.006
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.109
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.372 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→