Neuroimaging statistical approaches for determining neural correlates of Alzheimer's disease via positron emission tomography imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a degenerative disorder involving significant memory loss and other cognitive deficits, manifesting as a progression from normal cognitive functioning to mild cognitive impairment to AD. The sooner an accurate diagnosis of probable AD is made, the easier it is to manage symptoms and plan for future therapy. Functional neuroimaging stands to be a useful tool in achieving early diagnosis. Among the many neuroimaging modalities, positron emission tomography (PET) provides direct regional assessment of, among others, brain metabolism, cerebral blood flow, amyloid deposition—all quantities of interest in the characterization of AD. However, there are analytic challenges in identifying early indicators of AD from these high‐dimensional imaging data sets, and it is unclear whether early indicators of AD are more likely to emerge in localized patterns of brain activity or in patterns of correlation between distinct brain regions. Early PET‐based analyses of AD focused on alterations in metabolic activity at the voxel‐level or in anatomically defined regions of interest. Other approaches, including seed‐voxel and multivariate techniques, seek to characterize metabolic connectivity by identifying other regions in the brain with similar patterns of activity across subjects. We briefly review various neuroimaging statistical approaches applied to determine changes in metabolic activity or metabolic connectivity associated with AD. We then present an approach that provides a unified statistical framework for addressing both metabolic activity and connectivity. Specifically, we apply a Bayesian spatial hierarchical framework to longitudinal metabolic PET scans from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. This article is categorized under: Statistical and Graphical Methods of Data Analysis > Analysis of High Dimensional Data Statistical Learning and Exploratory Methods of the Data Sciences > Modeling Methods Statistical Models > Bayesian Models
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 | 0.015 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".