Distinct patterns of neurodegeneration after TBI and in Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a dementia risk factor, with Alzheimer's disease (AD) more common following injury. Patterns of neurodegeneration produced by TBI can be compared to AD and aging using volumetric MRI. METHODS: A total of 55 patients after moderate to severe TBI (median age 40), 45 with AD (median age 69), and 61 healthy volunteers underwent magnetic resonance imaging over 2 years. Atrophy patterns were compared. RESULTS: AD patients had markedly lower baseline volumes. TBI was associated with increased white matter (WM) atrophy, particularly involving corticospinal tracts and callosum, whereas AD rates were increased across white and gray matter (GM). Subcortical WM loss was shared in AD/TBI, but deep WM atrophy was TBI-specific and cortical atrophy AD-specific. Post-TBI atrophy patterns were distinct from aging, which resembled AD. DISCUSSION: Post-traumatic neurodegeneration 1.9-4.0 years (median) following moderate-severe TBI is distinct from aging/AD, predominantly involving central WM. This likely reflects distributions of axonal injury, a neurodegeneration trigger. HIGHLIGHTS: We compared patterns of brain atrophy longitudinally after moderate to severe TBI in late-onset AD and healthy aging. Patients after TBI had abnormal brain atrophy involving the corpus callosum and other WM tracts, including corticospinal tracts, in a pattern that was specific and distinct from AD and aging. This pattern is reminiscent of axonal injury following TBI, and atrophy rates were predicted by the extent of axonal injury on diffusion tensor imaging, supporting a relationship between early axonal damage and chronic neurodegeneration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".