MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4298108931 · doi:10.1101/2022.09.30.22280551

A DATA-DRIVEN EXAMINATION OF APATHY AND DEPRESSIVE SYMPTOMS IN DEMENTIA WITH INDEPENDENT REPLICATION

2022· preprint· en· W4298108931 on OpenAlexafffund
Miguel Vasconcelos Da Silva, G. J. Meléndez‐Torres, Zahinoor Ismail, Ingelin Testad, Clive Ballard, Byron Creese

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation TrustNIHR Maudsley Biomedical Research CentreNational Institutes of HealthGenentechIXICOH. Lundbeck A/SServierKing's College LondonMeso Scale DiagnosticsDepartment of Health and Social CareNational Institute on AgingNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchEisaiBioClinicaBiogenPfizerNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationF. Hoffmann-La RocheU.S. Department of DefenseEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsApathyDepression (economics)DemographicsLatent class modelDementiaPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryBiomarkerMedicineDiseaseInternal medicineCognitionMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Introduction Apathy is one of the most common neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) and is associated with poor clinical outcomes. Research that helps define the apathy phenotype is urgently needed, particularly for clinical and biomarker studies. Methods We used latent class analysis (LCA) with two independent cohorts to understand how apathy and depression symptoms co-occur statistically. We further explored the relationship between latent class membership, demographics and the presence of other NPS. Results The LCA identified a 4-class solution (No Symptoms, Apathy, Depression, and Combined Apathy/Depression), reproducible over both cohorts, providing robust support for an apathy syndrome distinct from depression and confirming that an apathy/depression syndrome exists. Discussion Using a data-driven method, we show distinct and statistically meaningful co-occurrence of apathy and depressive symptoms. There was evidence that these classes have different clinical associations which may help inform diagnostic categories for research studies and clinical practice.

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)0.077
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.192
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 score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0770.192
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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