MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311239449 · doi:10.1002/ana.26569

Alzheimer's Disease Genetic Risk, Cognition, and Brain Aging in Midlife

2022· article· en· W4311239449 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Willa D. Brenowitz, Myriam Fornage, Lenore J. Launer, Mohamad Habes, Christos Davatzikos, Kristine Yaffe

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Neurology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthSan Antonio Medical Foundation
KeywordsApolipoprotein EHyperintensityCognitionBrain sizeDementiaSubclinical infectionNeuroimagingMedicineConfidence intervalCognitive declineInternal medicinePsychologyNeuropsychologyAlzheimer's diseaseMontreal Cognitive AssessmentEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceDiseaseGerontologyMagnetic resonance imagingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined associations of an Alzheimer's disease (AD) Genetic Risk Score (AD-GRS) and midlife cognitive and neuroimaging outcomes in 1,252 middle-aged participants (311 with brain MRI). A higher AD-GRS based on 25 previously identified loci (excluding apolipoprotein E [APOE]) was associated with worse Montreal Cognitive Assessment (-0.14 standard deviation [SD] [95% confidence interval {CI}: -0.26, -0.02]), older machine learning predicted brain age (2.35 years[95%CI: 0.01, 4.69]), and white matter hyperintensity volume (0.35 SD [95% CI: 0.00, 0.71]), but not with a composite cognitive outcome, total brain, or hippocampal volume. APOE ε4 allele was not associated with any outcomes. AD risk genes beyond APOE may contribute to subclinical differences in cognition and brain health in midlife. ANN NEUROL 2023;93:629-634.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of NeurologySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207