MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294676146 · doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2022.103182

Associations between locus coeruleus integrity and diagnosis, age, and cognitive performance in older adults with and without late-life depression: An exploratory study

2022· article· en· W4294676146 on OpenAlexaff
Navona Calarco, Clifford Cassidy, Ben Selby, Colin Hawco, Aristotle N. Voineskos, Breno S. Diniz, Yuliya S. Nikolova

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage Clinical · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsLocus coeruleusDepression (economics)PsychologyCognitionLate life depressionNeuroscienceClinical psychologyBrain agingMedicinePsychiatryCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Late-life depression (LLD) is a risk factor for age-dependent cognitive deterioration. Norepinephrine-related degeneration in the locus coeruleus (LC) may explain this link. To examine the LC norepinephrine system in vivo, we acquired neuromelanin-sensitive MRI (NM-MRI) in a sample of 48 participants, including 25 with LLD (18 women, age 68.08 ± 5.41) and 23 never-depressed comparison participants (ND, 12 women, age 70 ± 8.02), matched on age and cognitive status. We employed a semi-automated procedure to segment the LC into three bilateral sections along its rostro-caudal extent, and calculated relative contrast as a proxy of integrity. Then, we examined associations between integrity and LLD diagnosis, age, and cognition, as measured via the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) and the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS). We did not identify an effect of LLD diagnosis nor age on LC integrity, but exploratory canonical correlation analysis across the combined participant sample revealed a strong (Rc = 0.853) and significant multivariate relationship between integrity and cognition (Wilks' λ = 0.03, F(84, 162.44) = 1.66, p = <.01). The first and only significant variate explained 72.83% model variance, and linked better attention and delayed memory performance, faster processing speed, and lower verbal fluency performance with higher integrity in the right rostral but lower integrity in the left caudal LC. Our results complement prior evidence of LC involvement in cognition in healthy older adults, and extend this association to individuals with LLD.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.583

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations31
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImage ClinicalSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207