MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4255333815 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2017.06.405

[P1–389]: TAU, Aβ‐AMYLOID, AND COGNITIVE FUNCTION FOLLOWING SERVICE‐RELATED TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY IN VIETNAM WAR VETERANS

2017· article· en· W4255333815 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tia L. Cummins, Alby Elias, Mal Hopwood, Jeffrey V. Rosenfeld, Vincent Doré, Fiona Lamb, Rob Williams, Victor L. Villemagne, Olivier Salvado, Colin L. Masters, Christopher C. Rowe, Rodney Guzman

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTraumatic brain injuryDementiaNeuropsychologyInternal medicineCohortGeriatric Depression ScaleDepression (economics)Montreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitionPathologicalPsychiatryDiseaseDepressive symptoms

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Often labelled the “signature wound” of modern day warfare, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) has been diagnosed in over 355,000 US military service personnel since 2000. Epidemiological research indicates that veterans with TBI are 2–4 times more likely to develop dementia than controls; however, mechanisms contributing to this relationship are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to investigate if Vietnam war veterans without mild cognitive impairment or dementia, but with TBI show evidence of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathological markers, as assessed by Aβ-amyloid, tau and glucose metabolism using PET, alongside neuropsychological testing. Fifty-five male participants - 29 veterans with TBI (aged 68.1±2.25 years) and 24 veteran controls (aged 69.6±5.29 years) - underwent neuropsychological assessment, FDG, tau (F-AV1451) and Ab-amyloid PET (F-Florbetaben). Standardized Uptake Value Ratios (SUVR) for all PET tracers were calculated using the cerebellar cortex as reference region. Analyses were adjusted for scores on the Geriatric Depression Scale and Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale. The TBI group performed significantly worse than controls on a number of measures across cognitive domains: WMS Logical Memory I & II (10.24 ±3.78 vs 14.33 ± 3.91, p<0.001; 8.48 ± 3.90 vs 11.63 ± 4.89, p=0.01), MoCA (25.59 ± 2.24 vs 28.12 ± 1.85, p<0.001) and MMSE (27.76 ± 1.70 vs 28.67 ± 0.96, p=0.02). However, the TBI cohort did not differ significantly from controls in F-AV1451 (1.17 ± 0.09 vs 1.15 ± 0.08, p=0.29), F-Florbetaben (1.34 ± 0.20 vs 1.27 ± 0.20, p=0.23) nor FDG tracer retention (1.08 ± 0.09 vs 1.08 ± 0.07, p=0.95). These preliminary findings suggest that whilst TBI is associated with later-life cognitive deficits, these deficits are not associated with AD pathology. Further study is needed to confirm our observations and to determine if direct brain injury can be detected to explain these later life deficits.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→