Coupling Between Hippocampal Parenchymal Fraction and Cortical Grey Matter Atrophy at Different Stages of Cognitive Decline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hippocampal atrophy is a significant brain marker of pathology in Alzheimer's disease (AD). The hippocampal parenchymal fraction (HPF) was recently developed to better assess the hippocampal volumetric integrity, and it has been shown to be a sensitive measure of hippocampal atrophy in AD. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical relevance of hippocampal volumetric integrity as measured by the HPF and the coupling between the HPF and brain atrophy during AD progression. METHODS: We included data from 143 cognitively normal (CN), 101 mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and 125 AD participants. We examined group differences in the HPF, associations between HPF and cognitive ability, and coupling between the HPF and cortical grey matter volume in the CN, MCI, and AD groups. RESULTS: We observed progressive decreases in HPF from CN to MCI and from MCI to AD, and increases in the asymmetry of HPF, with the lowest asymmetry index (AI) in the CN group and the highest AI in the AD group. There was a significant association between HPF and cognitive ability across participants. The coupling between HPF and cortical regions was observed in bilateral hippocampus, parahippocampal gyrus, temporal, frontal, and occipital regions, thalamus, and amygdala in CN, MCI, and AD groups, with a greater involvement of temporal, occipital, frontal, and subcortical regions in MCI and AD patients, especially in AD patients. CONCLUSION: This study provides novel evidence for the neuroanatomical basis of cognitive decline and brain atrophy during AD progression, which may have important clinical implications for the prognosis of AD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".