MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4287878853 · doi:10.1002/brb3.2728

Is Alzheimer's disease an infectious neurological disease? A review of the literature

2022· review· en· W4287878853 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain and Behavior · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiseaseDementiaAlzheimer's diseaseEtiologyMechanism (biology)MedicineMEDLINENeuroscienceInfectious disease (medical specialty)Intensive care medicineBioinformaticsPsychologyPsychiatryPathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a leading cause of dementia around the globe. Its pathogenesis is characterized primarily by the extracellular deposition of amyloid β peptides and intracellular neurofibrillary tangles. Despite the significant investments in neurological research, the exact molecular mechanism of AD pathogenesis is still not fully elucidated. Several studies converge on a hypothesis that pathogenic microbes might play a role in AD progression. Although this hypothesis has been considered relatively weak for decades, it has recently received considerable attention due to increasing evidence on the association between microorganisms and AD. There is a lack of experimental and scientific arguments conveying that these microorganisms engender cognitive and neuropathological deficits and modifications specific to AD, challenging the theory that it could be an infectious neurological disease. This review focuses on recent advances in the infection hypothesis and provides an overview of new findings portraying the significance of pathogenic microbes in AD and the challenges confronting the validity of the hypothesis. METHODOLOGY: Data were collected from medical journals published on PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, and Embase bibliographical databases with a predefined search strategy. All articles considering neurological disorders, especially AD associated with infectious diseases, were included. RESULTS: This work focused on providing an overview of new findings around the relationship between microorganisms and AD, challenges facing the validity of the theory, and recommendations on how the scientific community can best develop alternative approaches to address the pathophysiology of AD. CONCLUSION: While many studies reinforce the suspicion of an infectious etiology of AD, it is important to note that it is yet not validated how microorganisms' presence in the brain can develop AD due to the limited available evidence. Certainly, ground-breaking work is mandatory in this field of research, and these reports so far warrant a thorough investigation into how a chronic infection may remain silent while progressing its neuroinflammation. Amid this uncertainty arises the hope that many researchers will take on this challenge and join this endeavor to benefit AD patients worldwide.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.316 · 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