MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312087020 · doi:10.1002/alz.067068

NOVEL VIRTUAL REALITY‐ BASED METHOD FOR OBJECTIVE MEASUREMENT OF EMOTIONAL REACTIVITY IN PATIENTS WITH ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE

2022· article· en· W4312087020 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ramit Ravona‐Springer, Meytal Wilf, Or Koren, Uri Rosenblum, Noam Galor, Michal Lapid, Meir Plotnik

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBonferroni correctionStimulus (psychology)AudiologyCognitionNeuropathologyPsychologyReactivity (psychology)Montreal Cognitive AssessmentDiseaseClinical psychologyCognitive impairmentMedicineDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryInternal medicineCognitive psychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Diminished emotional reactivity in cognitively normal (CN) older adults and in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) is associated with higher burden of neuropathology and predicts faster cognitive decline, stressing its potential to serve as a behavioral screening tool for individuals at high AD‐risk and for a more aggressive disease course. Its measurement is currently based on questionnaires which are prone to subjectivity biases. We present preliminary results of a study aimed to examine the feasibility of using autonomic nervous system (ANS) reactivity to emotional stimuli presented in a virtual reality (VR) environment, as an objective measurement tool of emotional reactivity. Specifically, we test the hypothesis that emotional reactivity, as expressed by galvanic skin response (GSR), will be reduced in patients with AD compared to CN individuals. Method Participants are patients with mild‐ moderate AD and cognitively normal age matched controls. Cognitive function is assessed via the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) battery. Participants are exposed in the VR‐ environment to emotionally‐ laden stimuli (positive, neutral and aversive, 12 repetitions per stimulus type) while measuring GSR. Response weighted mean was calculated for each participant for each stimulus type. Non parametric group comparisons (AD vs. CN) were performed (U‐test) for each stimulus type separately (Bonferroni corrected). Result So far, 30 patients with AD and 21 CN individuals have been recruited. Participants' mean age is 75.6 years, 60.8 % females (Table 1). Patients with AD had lower scores on the MoCA (p<0.001), but did not differ from CN in demographic variables. VR‐based evaluation was well accepted by the participants with no adverse events. CN participants showed higher GSR reactivity as compared to AD patients for aversive stimuli (p<0.05) but not for neutral or positive stimuli (Figure 1). Conclusion GSR reactivity to emotional stimuli presented in the VR environment is a feasible method to study emotional reactivity in CN older adults and in participants with AD. GSR reactivity to aversive stimuli is reduced in AD participants compared to CN. These preliminary findings should be further established in larger populations while detecting the optimal type of stimulus required to differentiate between clinically distinguished cohorts.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.465
Threshold uncertainty score0.812

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicNeurological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207