Can the fNIRS-derived neural biomarker better discriminate mild cognitive impairment than a neuropsychological screening test?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Early detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), a pre-clinical stage of Alzheimer's disease (AD), has been highlighted as it could be beneficial to prevent progression to AD. Although prior studies on MCI screening have been conducted, the optimized detection way remain unclear yet. Recently, the potential of biomarker for MCI has gained a lot of attention due to a relatively low discriminant power of clinical screening tools. Methods: This study evaluated biomarkers for screening MCI by performing a verbal digit span task (VDST) using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) to measure signals from the prefrontal cortex (PFC) from a group of 84 healthy controls and 52 subjects with MCI. The concentration changes of oxy-hemoglobin (HbO) were explored during the task in subject groups. Results: Findings revealed that significant reductions in HbO concentration were observed in the PFC in the MCI group. Specially, the mean of HbO (mHbO) in the left PFC showed the highest discriminant power for MCI, which was higher than that of the Korean version of montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA-K) widely used as a screening tool for MCI. Furthermore, the mHbO in the PFC during the VDST was identified to be significantly correlated to the MoCA-K scores. Discussion: These findings shed new light on the feasibility and superiority of fNIRS-derived neural biomarker for screening MCI.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".